Jump to content

Kyler Murray and Cardinals agree to extension (46.1M / yr)


Forge

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Why can't a player take less money to keep the team competitive regardless of what his spouse makes?

I just have this pet peeve about fans wanting players to take less money. Their responsibility to the team is to produce on the field and stay out of trouble off of it. It's on the GM and contract people to manage salaries to keep their respective teams competitive. If you don't think a player is worth what he's asking, then trade him away, but I'm never going to fault a player for trying to get as much money as he possibly can.

Edited by BroncoSojia
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, StatKing said:

Why would the players willingly give leverage to the owners and GMs when it comes to contract negotiations? It isnt just about them or the team they play for, its about the guys after them as well.

Teams have to spend to the cap floor.   the QB taking 25% ofthe cap vs 20% of the cap just shifts the money to someone else.  Almost like being a team player

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BroncoSojia said:

I just have this pet peeve about fans wanting players to take less money. Their responsibility to the team is the produce on the field and stay out of trouble off of it. It's on the GM and contract people to manage salaries to keep their respective teams competitive. If you don't think a player is worth what he's asking, then trade him away, but I'm never going to fault a player for trying to get as much money as he possibly can.

Who said I want players to take less money?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BroncoSojia said:

I just have this pet peeve about fans wanting players to take less money. Their responsibility to the team is to produce on the field and stay out of trouble off of it. It's on the GM and contract people to manage salaries to keep their respective teams competitive. If you don't think a player is worth what he's asking, then trade him away, but I'm never going to fault a player for trying to get as much money as he possibly can.

It's pure fantasy.

How many of you are leaving massive money on the table so Bill in accounting can join your firm?

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BroncoSojia said:

Did I miss read the post I quoted? If I did, then it's just a point in general.

The discussion is not about me or anyone wanting a player to take less money.  But that Brady did and it likely aided in NE continuing to be ultra competitive and make many super Bowls.

Did Brady do that because we wanted to win titles above personal accolades of being x highest paid or because he didn't need to because Giselle made plenty?

Ultimately,  I do know why Brady did.  Each player has a choice in terms of contracts they seek and what that ripple effect is on team roster construction/ composition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, squire12 said:

The discussion is not about me or anyone wanting a player to take less money.  But that Brady did and it likely aided in NE continuing to be ultra competitive and make many super Bowls.

Did Brady do that because we wanted to win titles above personal accolades of being x highest paid or because he didn't need to because Giselle made plenty?

Ultimately,  I do know why Brady did.  Each player has a choice in terms of contracts they seek and what that ripple effect is on team roster construction/ composition.

If you're using Brady as a metric, than Kyler and the rest of the guys have another two decades to take less money.

Or are we pretending that Tom was a company man with every single deal he signed?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Who said I want players to take less money?

Right...

35 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Teams have to spend to the cap floor.   the QB taking 25% ofthe cap vs 20% of the cap just shifts the money to someone else.  Almost like being a team player

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I myself would not want to gamble on paying Murray that money after his late season implosion but I understand the pressure to keep your star QB.

One way to look at it is that if they just let him go they are not winning the SB the next 7 years anyway. They are betting on him being good and giving them a legit chance.

The other thing is that top QBs get paid the most depending on who is next. The Watson deal was a unicorn because 4 or 5 teams were bidding on him. His agent started a bidding war. He was only going to the one who gave him the most and guaranteed him the most.

I think the real damage on these kinds of deals is in the smaller paydays to the players #25-53 on the roster

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, seminoles1 said:

Right...

 

It's a philosophical statement.  I don't care what players make.  Saying it's on GM to figure out how to contruct a roster talented enough to produce a winner with " finite" resources is a tough ask.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BroncoSojia said:

I just have this pet peeve about fans wanting players to take less money. Their responsibility to the team is to produce on the field and stay out of trouble off of it. It's on the GM and contract people to manage salaries to keep their respective teams competitive. If you don't think a player is worth what he's asking, then trade him away, but I'm never going to fault a player for trying to get as much money as he possibly can.

I think for the vast majority of the players, they should definitely be getting whatever they can while they can. But there are a few stars, guys like Aaron Rodgers, who have made vast sums of money and pretend that they are all about getting another championship for their legacy. Rodgers has never left a dollar on the table, has been an *** about getting more security from his team when he already has more than just about any player in the league...I'd make the same case when talking about a guy like Peyton.

You know, when you already have hundreds of millions of dollars, maybe taking 10% less at the end of your career to get aid in getting a championship isn't unreasonable. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, squire12 said:

Why can't a player take less money to keep the team competitive regardless of what his spouse makes?

I never said he could or couldn’t.
@Deadpulse suggested that if players were paid based on what they’ve done in the league (like some have argued) then Brady would be at the top of the list and not #16. Then @BobbyPhil1781 mentioned that he always took team friendly deals and I responded that he had the means to take such a deal because of his wife’s millions. Let’s make sure not to hold him up on a pedestal as some virtuous person. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, BofaDeez54927 said:

If you're using Brady as a metric, than Kyler and the rest of the guys have another two decades to take less money.

Or are we pretending that Tom was a company man with every single deal he signed?

 

I mean, he literally was. He easily could have been the highest paid QB in the league in 05, but took less than Peyton and Vick. https://www.espn.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2054072

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...