sparky151 Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 Chad has more trade value than Boldin at the moment. Chad has been to 5 straight pro bowls and has several years left on his career. He is younger than Moss or Holt and 5 years younger than TO or Harrison. He has also put up his numbers while playing as the teams clear #1 receiver. Boldin is Arizona's #2 to Fitzgerald and has had a serious knee injury. On the other hand, Boldin is younger. Cap wise, Chad for Boldin is doable. Boldin want a new deal of course and so does TJ. I could live with a Boldin trade as long as the Bengals got a draft pick too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phatcat Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 [quote name='dieselman44' post='655747' date='Apr 23 2008, 11:02 AM']I believe the real problem lies with the players here. The players sign these multi year contracts because they want "security". But basically they want multi year deals because the signing bonus is larger in those contracts. Its kinda like the players want the best of both worlds here. You cant sign a 5 year deal, then in year 3 or 4 still expect to be one of the highest paid at your position, it just doesnt work that way. So, I see why the players claim they want "security" by signing a long term deal, but really is there security in any NFL contract? Therefore the players would actually be smarter to sign 2 year contracts with a max of maybe 3 years, therefore they will be able to stay among the highest paid at there position consistantly (if thats what they care about).[/quote] ^^^ ding ding ding. Well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeb Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 Chicago- multiple Drew clients in full rebellion for new contracts and so far the team is playing hardball and was able to resign Briggs without much competition. Cincinnati- Drew client Chad is getting shut down by the team playing hardball and all trade offers turned down. Arizona- Drew client Boldin is shut down by the team playing hardball and all trade offers turned down. *3 teams are now playing hardball with Drew clients. We're not the only one putting up with Drew and his crew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 I think we all can agree that Drew is ruining the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAGICTOUCH Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 FWIW: [quote][size=4][b]Cardinals turned down trade Redskins' offer for Boldin[/b][/size] ESPN.com news services Updated: April 23, 2008, 11:37 AM ET The Arizona Cardinals have no interest in dealing wide receiver Anquan Boldin, despite trade inquiries from other teams and a trade request by Boldin's agent. Boldin "We're not interested in trading Anquan," general manager Rod Graves said, according to the Arizona Republic. "That's the short of it." ESPN's Chris Mortensen reported that the Cardinals have declined a trade offer from the Washington Redskins for the five-year veteran. The Redskins also unsuccessfully sought to trade for disgruntled Cincinnati Bengals wide receiver Chad Johnson. The Philadelphia Eagles also have inquired about Boldin and are dangling Lito Sheppard as part of a deal. The Cards are saying no for now. Boldin is reportedly unhappy with his contract after the Cardinals re-signed fellow Arizona wideout Larry Fitzgerald to a four-year, $40 million deal. The Cards say that they won't re-do Boldin's deal so he's asked out, Mortensen reported. Boldin's agent, Drew Rosenhaus, recently asked the team if it would be willing to trade his client, Cardinals officials said, according to the Republic. The Cardinals said no and don't plan to allow Rosenhaus to seek a trade. "Anquan is a quality person and a great player," Graves said, according to the report. "We're hoping we can agree on a longer-term deal." The newspaper reported that neither Rosenhaus nor Boldin could be reached for comment. The roots of the trade talk extend to last summer, when Boldin and Rosenhaus met with Graves and coach Ken Whisenhunt to discuss a new deal. Rosenhaus, according to the Cardinals, made a proposal, and the Cardinals made a counterproposal in late November or early December, according to the report. Graves said that offer would have put Boldin among the five highest-paid receivers within three years, the Republic reported. "Drew did not respond to that proposal," Graves said, according to the report. "The proposal sat with him over a month. I called to ask him if he was going to respond, and he said he was going to wait until Larry Fitzgerald [contract] was done." Boldin has three years left on his current contract with the team. ESPN reporter Chris Mortensen contributed to this report.[/quote] [url="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3363170&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines"]http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?i...e=ESPNHeadlines[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 good for the cards, its about time teams start standing up to Drew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DontPushMe Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 [quote name='Bunghole' post='655535' date='Apr 22 2008, 09:57 PM']I think that the owners are going to have to address this issue for the next CBA. What in the fuck good are contracts if they are so easily voided? If the cap keeps going up and up, how many more players are going to demand more money while still under contract? Especially in a situation like this one. Player A just got a new contract and is making more than Player B. Player B feels he is as good or better than player A, but is still under the terms of his old contract. So now Player B is whining for a new contract, and agents like Drew Rosenhaus (whom get roughly 10% of every contract) are encouraging them to be malcontents to force a trade or a new contract. Where does this stop? The TO model has been proven to pay off, and now Chad, Boldin and soon to be others are going to go for this behavior. It's complete bullshit. Honor your contract or don't sign the fucking thing.[/quote] I agree. Something has to be done. These guys are signing huge deals, pocketing the signing bonus, playing them for a couple of years, then doing wahtever they have to to get a new contract and new signing bonus. This is going to turn off a lot of fans, its already starting to turn me off. Some kind of agreement needs to be made so that this stuff can no longer happen. I also would prefer us just hold chad. Hes stuck here for 3 years if he doesnt play so were it me i'd just ruin his career. Let him sit out every game and forfeit his salary, then let him into free agency when hes too old to get the contract he'd get now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-GoBengals- Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 [quote name='dieselman44' post='655747' date='Apr 23 2008, 11:02 AM']WhileI agree something needs to be done, I dont agree that guaranteeing all contracts is the answer. If the league were to do that then what is the guarantee for the owners that the players have incentive to play to the best of their ability? (NFL would turn into MLB guys like Adrain Beltre for example. play well during contract year, get paid millions, then take it easy) I believe with the current system of the contracts being not guaranteed it forces the players to play to the best of their ability. I believe the real problem lies with the players here. The players sign these multi year contracts because they want "security". But basically they want multi year deals because the signing bonus is larger in those contracts. Its kinda like the players want the best of both worlds here. You cant sign a 5 year deal, then in year 3 or 4 still expect to be one of the highest paid at your position, it just doesnt work that way. So, I see why the players claim they want "security" by signing a long term deal, but really is there security in any NFL contract? Therefore the players would actually be smarter to sign 2 year contracts with a max of maybe 3 years, therefore they will be able to stay among the highest paid at there position consistantly (if thats what they care about).[/quote] i think you would see more incentive based contracts... but you have a valid point... there is no perfect answer, but aside from uncapped years there isnt much worse of a situation we could have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-GoBengals- Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 also a claus stating any holdout period will result in immediate payback of the entire signing bonus of the contract.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Actium Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 [quote name='GoBengals' post='655554' date='Apr 22 2008, 10:24 PM']if the other side were fair i think you would have a point, the teams can cut players in mid contract too.. lets quit the BS games of back loaded fake deals players will never see and the i want more BS, make contracts guaranteed. that will even things up REAL quick.[/quote] the baseball model of guaranteed contracts, plus arbitration for those with time served but without FA eligibility, might work in a cap situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 [quote name='GoBengals' post='656016' date='Apr 23 2008, 04:37 PM']also a claus stating any holdout period will result in immediate payback of the entire signing bonus of the contract..[/quote] Clauses like no hold outs or no criticism (the Pickens clause) used to be permitted under the CBA. The new CBA limits the amount of signing bonus that can be gone after to a prorated amount for any games missed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.