Plax is holding out

[Virginia Giant]

The league should limit every contract to 1 year. That puts an end to hold outs.

[Nas]

The league should limit every contract to 1 year. That puts an end to hold outs.

 

That's not practical. I think the league should stay out of this. It's up to the team when they finalize the contract to add that clause that says: "In the even of a player hold out, the team reserves the right to penalize the player up to $500,000 for each day"

[Clarence the Blue Puppet]

My issue with it is, if the Giants decide not to do it, Plax is holding out. Despite his accomplishments, he signed a deal, and to not honor it because the Giants won't renegotiate is wrong, plain and simple. Plax and his agent should continue talking to the F.O. to get something worked out, but in the meantime, suit up and do what you're paid for.

 

You know if he and his agent talked to the FO WHILE he practice, I bet you anything the FO would be more than happy to give him an extension and more money. Holding out only makes him look like a selfish prick, all the while making it harder for the FO to want to give him what he wants.

[BronxRik]

That's not practical. I think the league should stay out of this. It's up to the team when they finalize the contract to add that clause that says: "In the even of a player hold out, the team reserves the right to penalize the player up to $500,000 for each day"

 

I believe a team already has that right. I don't know what the amount is, but wasn't Strahan fined each day he didn't show up?

 

 

You know if he and his agent talked to the FO WHILE he practice, I bet you anything the FO would be more than happy to give him an extension and more money. Holding out only makes him look like a selfish prick, all the while making it harder for the FO to want to give him what he wants.

 

Ya know, YOU should be a super agent to the stars of the NFL. You should change your member name to Ali$$.

[RandolphScott]

That's not practical. I think the league should stay out of this. It's up to the team when they finalize the contract to add that clause that says: "In the even of a player hold out, the team reserves the right to penalize the player up to $500,000 for each day"

 

 

Half a million dollars? Get real.

 

Oh and Bronx, Strahan was fined like 20 G's a day for missing camp.

[Money]

He's never 'outplayed' anything. He got paid what he was worth at the time for all the reasons I've already covered.

 

Anyone signing a big, long contract knows full well that they won't see the end of it if they're not stellar. That's what all the negotiations over guaranteed money are about.

 

Every time he stepped on the field from September 2005 to Super Bowl XLII, he was more valuable than he was on March 17, 2005. His value has increased because (a) he improved as a player, and (b) the market for players has changed.

 

He also signed his contract in a vastly different cap atmosphere. It's no so much about loyalty but about circumstance. You could certainly take issue with the timing of the holdout, but we don't know what's happening in the negotiations. Fortunately, he has an outstanding agent who's the best dealmaker in his profession, so there's reason to trust their tactics.

[Money]

Lock him up for the rest of his career? He's not even honoring the 6 year deal.

 

He was an integral part of the Giants getting to and winning the Superbowl, no question. Does he deserve some reward for that? Absolutely. But if he doesn't get a reward based on that performance, holding out on his contract is not the answer. He signed it and that is that. Maybe he should have thought about including a 'Superbowl Bonus' clause in the terms of the original contract. If he's so pissed off about it, let him play it out, and bail when it's up. Trust me, if any of us signed a contract and didn't honor it, we'd be sued post haste.

 

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

[Money]

The league should limit every contract to 1 year. That puts an end to hold outs.

 

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.

[Money]

That's not practical. I think the league should stay out of this. It's up to the team when they finalize the contract to add that clause that says: "In the even of a player hold out, the team reserves the right to penalize the player up to $500,000 for each day"

 

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

[Money]

Half a million dollars? Get real.

 

Oh and Bronx, Strahan was fined like 20 G's a day for missing camp.

 

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

[Nas]

Half a million dollars? Get real.

 

Oh and Bronx, Strahan was fined like 20 G's a day for missing camp.

 

I just threw a # out there. Now understand this.. when the player signs a contract, he's usually happy as shit... last thing on his mind is a hold out half way thru his contract... he'll probably look at the clause with a smirk on his face.. and sign anyway. Now think about it.. if a player is fine half a million for each day (up to the contract amount for that year of course), how many players will even THINK of holding out?

[Nas]

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

 

Not really. That clause is there when a contract is signed.. as I stated in my previous response, it will be a great deterrence.

[BronxRik]

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

We all get that.....that's what most people are up in arms about. Again, we all agree he played hurt, he caught the superbowl winning TD, he had a great season....been said umpteen times in this thread. Most are in agreement he should get a new contract, but not at the expense of a holdout. What does him holding out really do anyway? He signed a six year deal. He's 3 years into it. If he holds out, sure we lose the best WR we have, but more importantly (to Plax anyway), his reputation will be ruined and his stock with any other team will surely drop. And if his true intention is to retire a Giant, this is a helluva way to go about it. As I said in a previous post.....Plax and Rosenhaus should continue to talk to the front office to get something worked out, but in the meantime, he should suit up and do what he is paid to do.

 

I'll tell you what really concerns me about all this......is if the Giants don't re-negotiate, he gets held to the original deal, and "phones in" a couple of seasons until his contract year comes around.

[Virginia Giant]

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.

Somehow this board has lost all it's sarcasm detecting ability.

[BronxRik]

Somehow this board has lost all it's sarcasm detecting ability.

We turned it off in the Admin Control Panel just for this thread.

[ccase39]

The guy shut his mouth last year, played hurt, and was clutch is a LOT of big games for us.

 

His deal at the time was considered a "steal" because he had a bad rep and was considered whiney and underachieving.

 

Pay him what he deserves, we just freed up money from Strahan's retirement, no? He's the best wideout we've had in a long time... and lock up Snee while we're at it, too.

pay the man for christ sake

[Nas]

pay the man for christ sake

 

He is getting paid. He just has to wait his turn and honor his current contract. Besides, it's not like he played lights out every year.. only last season... that's it.

[Treehugger]

Every time he stepped on the field from September 2005 to Super Bowl XLII, he was more valuable than he was on March 17, 2005. His value has increased because (a) he improved as a player, and (b) the market for players has changed.

He also signed his contract in a vastly different cap atmosphere. It's no so much about loyalty but about circumstance. You could certainly take issue with the timing of the holdout, but we don't know what's happening in the negotiations. Fortunately, he has an outstanding agent who's the best dealmaker in his profession, so there's reason to trust their tactics.

Here's the beef though: He's NOT on the market, he's under contract. We "locked him up".

 

He can't demand a long contract for job security then refuse it when that same long term is holding back a new payday. Seriously, there should be at least one more year playing at his current level before this is even a discussion.

 

It's a league-wide problem with player attitude and it's fueled by assholes like Drew Rosenhaus. He made the last deal, right? The one he's trying to weasel out of now? What kind of credibility does the guy have left?

[RandolphScott]

Here's the beef though: He's NOT on the market, he's under contract. We "locked him up".

 

He can't demand a long contract for job security then refuse it when that same long term is holding back a new payday. Seriously, there should be at least one more year playing at his current level before this is even a discussion.

 

It's a league-wide problem with player attitude and it's fueled by assholes like Drew Rosenhaus. He made the last deal, right? The one he's trying to weasel out of now? What kind of credibility does the guy have left?

 

 

None, how do you think he became such a ruthless agent?

[Nas]

None, how do you think he became such a ruthless agent?

 

All it takes for this problem to "go away" is for GMs to get together and say "fuck this guy". That's it.. no ifs ands or buts about it. Don't sign his players... have them go to the CFL..

[boohyah]

Here's the beef though: He's NOT on the market, he's under contract. We "locked him up".

 

He can't demand a long contract for job security then refuse it when that same long term is holding back a new payday. Seriously, there should be at least one more year playing at his current level before this is even a discussion.

 

It's a league-wide problem with player attitude and it's fueled by assholes like Drew Rosenhaus. He made the last deal, right? The one he's trying to weasel out of now? What kind of credibility does the guy have left?

 

 

Drew Rosenhaus may be an asshole, but remember the Giants wouldn't deal with Plaxico's original agent and even announced they had stopped negotiating with Plaxico, which hurt Burress a lot in the open market (which admittedly wasn't much). Still Plaxico fired the original agent and hired Rosenhaus, who got the deal done.

 

If I'm correct, The Giants and Rosenhaus do not have a bad relationship. Rosenhaus has been negotiating with the Giants for the last few months and nothing has been finalized. And although Rosenhaus can advise Burress to hold out, he can't make him, that's Plax.

 

The issue here is that it is absolutely stupid for the league not to have something in place that a guy like Burress and Shockey to show up at minicamp and not participate and not get fined. You don't wanna practice, you stay at home and you get fined. Simple as that. And if the CBA allows the players to do that, then the league did a shitty job in negotiations.

[Money]

Not really. That clause is there when a contract is signed.. as I stated in my previous response, it will be a great deterrence.

 

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...

[Money]

We all get that.....that's what most people are up in arms about. Again, we all agree he played hurt, he caught the superbowl winning TD, he had a great season....been said umpteen times in this thread. Most are in agreement he should get a new contract, but not at the expense of a holdout. What does him holding out really do anyway? He signed a six year deal. He's 3 years into it. If he holds out, sure we lose the best WR we have, but more importantly (to Plax anyway), his reputation will be ruined and his stock with any other team will surely drop. And if his true intention is to retire a Giant, this is a helluva way to go about it. As I said in a previous post.....Plax and Rosenhaus should continue to talk to the front office to get something worked out, but in the meantime, he should suit up and do what he is paid to do.

 

I'll tell you what really concerns me about all this......is if the Giants don't re-negotiate, he gets held to the original deal, and "phones in" a couple of seasons until his contract year comes around.

 

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....

[Money]

Here's the beef though: He's NOT on the market, he's under contract. We "locked him up".

 

He can't demand a long contract for job security then refuse it when that same long term is holding back a new payday. Seriously, there should be at least one more year playing at his current level before this is even a discussion.

 

It's a league-wide problem with player attitude and it's fueled by assholes like Drew Rosenhaus. He made the last deal, right? The one he's trying to weasel out of now? What kind of credibility does the guy have left?

 

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.

 

[Money]

All it takes for this problem to "go away" is for GMs to get together and say "fuck this guy". That's it.. no ifs ands or buts about it. Don't sign his players... have them go to the CFL..

 

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