Money

We never won a playoff game with him. And we rattled off four consecutive wins without him. That doesn't mean we're better without him, but it certainly means we can continue to have success while he's playing for another team. Losing him absolutely makes us weaker - on paper. If he didn't want to be a member of the Giants, and he was ready to either holdout or be disruptive, then trading him away makes us a better team. Chemistry counts for a lot, and unhappy players generally detract fromt high-achievement environments.

He didn't want to be here. He forced his way off the team. Keeping him was an untenable option. What would you have the team do? Hypnotizing him into wanted to be a Giant again??

Actually we wouldn't be able to do anything with Shockey because he didn't want to be here. But please allow Shockey's decision to alienate himeself from the team to ignite your unmitigated hatred of Kevin Boss...

There were a variety of reasons. It's never just one thing. Steve Smith was the reason! No, Eli was accurate! No, Shockey was a distraction! No, Bradshaw drove an ice cream made of human skulls! No, Gilbride removed a crayon in his brain and his IQ improved 79 points! No, I want a hot dog... Look at the big picture. A lot of underlying factors galvanized the team -- both offense AND defense -- during the Super Bowl run. From there, we learned the team can be successful (technically as successful as possible) without Shockey. But it's never just one or two things.

Valuations of his talent aside, he left the team no other choice. They had to trade him or otherwise deal with an enormous distraction. He practically begged his way off the team, and his wish was granted. I hope he does well, because I know we'll continue to build on the success we experienced in his absence.

Carr couldn't beat out Vinny Testaverde and undrafted rookie Matt Moore last year. He's a shell of his former self, and he was a lousy QB to begin with...

He signed his contract under a different cap environment, and upon the arrival of the new cap environment, he was underpaid. That's the point. It's extraordinarily simple.

Wright supplanted Lorezen as our 2ns string QB last year, so it's no surprise that Jared was deemed more expendable. I think Wright outlasts Carr, as well.

That's actually FOX's broadcast plan. Terry interviews the winning team. He did so for both the NFC Championship Game and the Super Bowl. He's done it in previous years as well. It has absolutely nothing to do with the pre-game picks...

Collinsworth hasn't worked for FOX in years....

Now there's some tremendous reasoning. The fans got loudest when Shockey caught a pass, therefore he is indispensible. The fans gotta really loud whenever Tiki Barber made a big play. The team will never recover from his departure.

When was the last time NFL teams conspired to blackball a player?

He's been a top receiver all three years he's been here. His bargaining power not only lies in his performance, but also the lucrative contracts signed by other wide receivers. Here's a thread I authored on BBI elaborating on how his contract currently compares to his peers. Lastly, he such rare talent that if the Giants decide not to cooperate, he can take his services elsewhere...after all, only 10 or 12 guys in the world can do what he does, so someone would be more than happy to sign him to a contract in line with Javon Walker and Bernard Berrian.

Soapbox, eh. I do not think it means what you think it means.

When it comes down to it, I think the worst he'll is do is sit out most of training camp and come back in time for the regular season. That's what Owens did when he was advised to holdout by Rosenhaus. Same with Javon Walker. Not exactly the best solution, but certainly better than playing without Plax.

Just the way it works. If he's on the opening day roster, he's entitled to his salary for the season. He would be subjected to fines, but the he'd still count against the cap. Alternatively, the team could suspend him without pay, as the Eagles did with Terrell Owens and the Bucs did with Keyshawn Johnson. But the team would still be on the hook for his $4.9 million cap number this year.

That's one team, so it's merely an organizational decision. But for multiple teams to make a behind-closed-doors agreement to not sign Rosenhaus clients, that would constitute collusion. They would be conspiring to restrain trade. Baseball's CBA, as negotiated by Marvin Miller, actually states, "Players shall not act in concert with other Players and Clubs shall not act in concert with other Clubs." The NFL operates on the same principles, albeit with different verbiage.

That's called collusion and it's illegal. It's a blatant restraint of trade.

Contracts aren't sacred pacts. They are routinely violated or restructured by both sides of the table. Even though he is under contract, Plax is by no means locked up. Saying a player of Plax's caliber is under contract really means nothing in the grand scheme of things; he has the bargaining power to demand a new contract for the aforementioned reasons. If the Giants refuse to comply, he can either sit out and continue to get paid or he can take his services elsewhere. I really disagree that holdouts are that big of a league problem. There's maybe a handful each year. And usually the situation is settled amicably. Plus, it's hard to blame these guys for procuring as much money as they can given the nature of their profession.

He would still get paid if he holds out. The team would trade him or release him before allowing him to holdout for multiple years. In which case, he wins -- he gets a more lucrative contract. I really doubt his reputation would be all that much damaged....

It will be a great deterrence ... for players signing with the team. No good player would voluntarily prevent himself from being able to revisit his contract and potentially holdout. No agent would allow it to happen either. The player would just sign with a team that would only fine him peanuts for missing training camp...

It was $14,000 and change IIRC. And the team never actually enforced the fine.

And that team would effectively prevent itself from signing any player worth a damn....

I really don't think holdouts are that big of a problem to precipitate a drastic change to the league's salary structure. Your solution would cause too much player movement, and that would hurt the popularity of the league. Plus, the players union would never agree to it since it constrains the amount of thoney they could make.

If he doesn't get a new contract, then there's a chance he won't play. He has bargaining power.