Originally posted by WINiner:Originally posted by blizzuntz:Originally posted by thojess:Originally posted by billbird2111:Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Russell will be represented in the grievance by the NFL Players Association.
This one line interested me more than anything else. You really think the Player's Association is going to waste a bunch of coin on some slacker who essentially gave the league -- and a lot of other players -- a big black eye?
Remember -- the NFLPA represents ALL players. And if I was paying dues into the NFLPA -- I wouldn't want ONE CENT of my contribution to pay for lawyers to defend Jamarcus.
Think about it. Would you? Most players in the NFL will never even begin to SNIFF the kind of contract money that Jamarcus got. Not even CLOSE.
And now those same players are going to pony up -- through NFLPA dues -- defense money for Jamarcus?
What r u smokin?
Silly argument. The NFLPA is certainly motivated to ensure that signing bonuses and other guaranteed money stays guaranteed. You're argument is emotional and foolish and doesn't consider the legal ramifications of setting such a dangerous precedent.
And the fact that Russel contract helped many veterans get bigger contracts. When a rookie gets a big contract, veterans get happy bc that means future contracts are larger based on precedence(sp)
I disagree completely. Vets HATE rookie contracts because a VERY small percentage of Vets actually get those blockbuster deals while they watch some snot nosed punk gain a contract that's likely to never be seen by that particular Vet, and for potential rather than performance.
Disagree all you like, but guaranteed money effects everyone not just snot nosed punk rookies. No effing way they let old Al get away with this one.