Packerraymond Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 9 hours ago, Beast said: Also if he gets the new contract, the reality is he's given up absolutely nothing... as the whole "given up" argument only works under the current contract. His group is simply betting they they're going to get a new contract and his group is probably right, just like Raiders OT Donald Penn did last year... the main question is how long does it take to get it completed. It would help if the Raiders, you know, called him. This isn't a standard holdout. We've seen the news on Bell, he and the Steelers tries to negotiate, didn't agree and he's holding out until week 1. We've seen Donald and the Rams are close according to multiple sources. We haven't even heard the Raiders talk to Mack. Something is fishy here to me. Either the Raiders don't have the finances for the bonus, or they're dead set on him playing on the 5th year option. Which is now worth 11m not 13. I believe you can waive all the penalties he's accured if he signs a new deal, but I don't think they can be waived if he just shows up and plays the 5th year option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 Just now, Outpost31 said: Lol at the current discussion. Mack's estimated net worth right now is 9.6 million dollars, and if anybody is about to let 2 million dollars go to make a point, I'm not sure that's the type of mind that I want on this team. He's willing to let 2m go to make 100m, that's not a point, that's an investment in one's self. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 8 minutes ago, St Vince said: 2M is a lot for fringe athletes not superstar athletes. Heck Woodson donated 2M to a children's hospital in 2009. Lance Kendricks couldn't afford to do that. Mack knows his worth and knows he's about to break the bank either in a Raider uniform or another. Superstar athletes like Julio Jones? OBJ? Why aren't those players holding out longer if the lost money means so little to them? There's a reason why it's rare for players under contract to continue holding out as the season approaches. It's because they actually do care about losing 2M dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 Just now, Packerraymond said: He's willing to let 2m go to make 100m, that's not a point, that's an investment in one's self. Nope. He's going to get paid one way or another. You can't say he's willing to let 2 million go to make 100 million because that would suggest he wouldn't get a new deal unless he did sit out. We all know he's going to get another deal, and we all know he's going to get paid 18 million per in the absolute worst case scenario. He's willing to let 2 million go to make 10 million more. Every week he sits out, he's worth less in a deal, too. He's worth less to the Raiders the longer he sits out, and he's worth less to a different team the longer he sits out. This isn't somebody sitting out and missing a training camp and preseason with a coach he's been with for five years. It's a brand new coaching staff. With each week he sits out, he's less likely to be traded to a new team for what he's worth, which makes the Raiders less likely to trade him. Let's say the Packers have offered both first round picks for Mack. You don't think the Packers are less-inclined to keep that deal valid two, three weeks into the season considering Mack would have to learn a completely new defensive scheme? Therefore, sitting out makes it less likely for another team to pay him what he wants since the Raiders would be less likely to trade him considering the midseason compensation they would get for him. You can't win this argument. If the Raiders wouldn't pay Mack 18 million per year over 5 years, that's a serious red flag. They know something we don't. 18 per for 5 years = 90 million dollars. 20 per for 5 years = 100 million dollars. Therefore, he's willing to lose close to a million dollars every game in order to make 10 million more over 5 years. You think that's intelligent betting? Losing close to a million dollars a week in order to gain 10 million more over 5 years? Run that by your accountant. The Raiders play the Rams in week one. After that game, he is going to lose any upper hand he could possibly have as the Raiders play the Broncos, Dolphins, Browns. The longer he holds out, the more money he loses. If he holds out long enough for a playoff appearance to be unlikely, why would the Raiders do it at that point? If he holds out long enough for the Raiders to be poised for a playoff appearance without him, why would they do it then? If he goes into the offseason after having held out the entire year, the Raiders could franchise tag him and hold him hostage another year, lowering his value even more with a year of sitting out of football. There's a reason players don't win their holdouts. Teams know their real worth more than they do. You think the Texans would have allowed JJ Watt to get this far into a holdout? Packers with Aaron Rodgers? The further he gets into his holdout shows what the Raiders really think of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannondale Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 The Raiders don't have to do anything. Mack is under contract and holds no cards. The Packers would probably do the same. "You coach the players that are here." No need to engage with a pouting child. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 57 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: It would help if the Raiders, you know, called him. This isn't a standard holdout. We've seen the news on Bell, he and the Steelers tries to negotiate, didn't agree and he's holding out until week 1. We've seen Donald and the Rams are close according to multiple sources. We haven't even heard the Raiders talk to Mack. Something is fishy here to me. Either the Raiders don't have the finances for the bonus, or they're dead set on him playing on the 5th year option. Which is now worth 11m not 13. I believe you can waive all the penalties he's accured if he signs a new deal, but I don't think they can be waived if he just shows up and plays the 5th year option. You're correct, if he stays on the same team, he might lose the money (if the Raiders choose to not pay it). But just because we didn't heard it, doesn't mean it hasn't happened. There seem to be some plans and negotiations involved somewhere/somehow. Quote This is a negotiation,” Gruden separately told SiriusXM NFL Radio. “Joel Segal is Khalil’s agent. They’ve got their plan. General Manager Reggie McKenzie and the people negotiating on our end have a plan. I keep going back to the Raiders last hold out which was last year with OT Donald Penn and McKenzie (which Gruden said is the one in talks negotiating) and McKenzie's basic public stance was we aren't negotiating with anyone who's not in camp. Then a few weeks later, Penn showed up and almost automatically got a new contract just like they quietly negotiated it in advance and Penn didn't show up until it was completed, which I figure might be going on here too... just they're further apart on the actual money offer, because as Raiders fans have pointed out, they could keep him for three years (using two franchise tags) and have him still be cheaper than the contract he's reportedly asking for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 Rodgers to Gruden: Thanks for sending us Mack ! " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 45 minutes ago, Outpost31 said: There's a reason players don't win their holdouts. Teams know their real worth more than they do. You think the Texans would have allowed JJ Watt to get this far into a holdout? Packers with Aaron Rodgers? The further he gets into his holdout shows what the Raiders really think of him. I think people are WAY too focused on the holdout aspect... like a horny man trying without sex from his very sexy wife, you know the holdout will only last until it starts threatening his future (or less), in hold out cases, that threatening the future limit is what the accrued season limit, which I'm not sure, but I believe says he has to play 9 or 10 games or something? Point being, this side is a set limit basically... and he'll probably show up at some point just like Aaron Donald did last year for the Rams. But the contract negotiation part is the important part... and based from that side of things the Packers have and currently are holding out from Rodgers' new contract just as long or longer than the Raiders have held out from Mack's new contract. So just because they're not automatically giving in, doesn't mean they don't really value the person as a top guy, just that their request are more than they'd prefer. Mack probably wants to break Von Miller's mark as highest paid edge rusher and the Raiders probably want the cost of what the Franchise tags would cost for the next couple of years which would be cheaper than a record breaking deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 I'm reading that body language the opposite way you are... look at the lip biting and the hands. Gruden: I'm gonna trade Carr and Mack to the Pack, so I can have you Aaron Rodgers: (fake smile) PERSONAL SPACE, GIVE ME SOME PERSONAL SPACE (hand block) 19 minutes ago, Shanedorf said: Rodgers to Gruden: Thanks for sending us Mack ! " Also I got to give Rodgers credit on his blocking form, it's almost perfect pass blocking technique that the OL is taught, hand on each side and squeeze, so they can have more control of the defender. The difference being OL is taught to do it on the shoulder pads, while Rodgers is doing it on the mid-section, which makes it more discreet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 I don't think ENOUGH attention has been paid to players who hold out. Just reflect back on some of the players who have held out and tell me how many of them ended up being worth what they wanted. You all doubt it because you're blinded by Mack, but if Mack had been a Packer all these years, you'd all be arguing that he's not worth re-signing at the price he's asking for. Don't deny it. You know it's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 Is there a reason a horny man is trying without sex from his very sexy wife? I'm not making the connection to the Mack situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 6 hours ago, Reaper said: Next season I would approach both perry and Mathews with restructure/contract offers if one bites the other is gone. There’s no benefit to getting rid of Perry next year. He’d cost 11m cap hit in dead money if cut/traded/restructured. & 7.4m the following yr. They’re not going to save any money by doing anything with him until maybe the last year of his current contract in 2021. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 Yeah, I didn't even want to touch on that sex with sexy wife analogy. I didn't understand it, and I didn't want to try to understand it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 22 minutes ago, Leader said: Is there a reason a horny man is trying without sex from his very sexy wife? I'm not making the connection to the Mack situation 'Return of the Mack..' Playing in the background as the guy struts up trying without sex from his very sexy wife. Edit: As a Raider fan I heard mack was in Oakland. I thought he snuck onboard the Green Bay plane to further raise expectations of the trade talks?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBURGE Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 9 minutes ago, Outpost31 said: Yeah, I didn't even want to touch on that sex with sexy wife analogy. I didn't understand it, and I didn't want to try to understand it. I knew this day would come. You see, when a man and a woman love each other.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.