Azrael wrote:I'm getting pretty tired of these guys playing well for one year (well not even that, what, 12 games) and then wanting a nice deal. I'd be like hold out then fool if I was GBP. See how fun it is sitting on your can getting no check. See how many teams want you after you haven't touched a football in a year, knowing your track record is 12 frickin' games 2 years ago. Show me you can do it again for a whole year and then we'll talk.
It's like these idiot receivers who get big deals and then 2 years later want a new deal because someone they think they are better than got more money than them.
In other sports, I would agree with you Azrael. But football doesn't have guaranteed contracts. If a team doesn't think that a player is worth their salary, then they can be cut. So isn't it only fair to the player that if they believe they outperformed their salary, then they should get a raise?
Hmmm...Favre, you can't come back because we've moved on and it would disrupt the offense to insert you back in there...yet, we are willing to let our young, inexperienced RB holdout and miss valuable training camp time...
Packers management is creating a PR nightmare - and this cannot possibly help. Ted Thompson is looking increasingly like a tightwad who refuses to do what is in the best interest of the team to retain the best interest of his ego.
dgan wrote:Hmmm...Favre, you can't come back because we've moved on and it would disrupt the offense to insert you back in there...yet, we are willing to let our young, inexperienced RB holdout and miss valuable training camp time...
Packers management is creating a PR nightmare - and this cannot possibly help. Ted Thompson is looking increasingly like a tightwad who refuses to do what is in the best interest of the team to retain the best interest of his ego.
Sucks.
its ok because Grant said he likes Rodgers better, so that makes him a pretty good guy in Thompson's book
dgan wrote:Hmmm...Favre, you can't come back because we've moved on and it would disrupt the offense to insert you back in there...yet, we are willing to let our young, inexperienced RB holdout and miss valuable training camp time...
Packers management is creating a PR nightmare - and this cannot possibly help. Ted Thompson is looking increasingly like a tightwad who refuses to do what is in the best interest of the team to retain the best interest of his ego.
Sucks.
its ok because Grant said he likes Rodgers better, so that makes him a pretty good guy in Thompson's book
I hope the Packers don't sign this bum . He's the type of player that'll disappoint during the season after signing a contract.. Hopefully the Packers tell Ryan to show them that he can replicate last year's performance...
Jackson making strides while Grant holds out Backup scoring points in camp By TOM SILVERSTEIN tsilverstein@journalsentinel.com Posted: July 30, 2008
The similarity between Brett Favre and Ryan Grant is that both want to attend the Green Bay Packers' training camp.
The difference is that when Grant finally comes in, he’ll be a starter.
Seeking a long-term deal from the Packers, the running back remains at home without a contract, waiting for negotiations to kick into gear so he can move his workouts from his New Jersey home to Clarke Hinkle Field. The two sides remain far apart on a deal and it could be weeks before Grant is in camp.
In the meantime, Grant’s starting job is secure but backup Brandon Jackson is more than keeping it warm, and with every carry he has received in training camp he has made a case for getting the ball. When Grant returns, Jackson might be entrenched far enough that the two will share the starting position.
“As far as everything we thought this kid was capable of being and doing, we’re starting to see more of that,” running backs coach Edgar Bennett said. “We saw that last year, but now you’re seeing it more on a consistent basis. The sky’s the limit for him. I’m not going to say it just to say it. I mean it.”
What is all this nonsense about a hold out? A hold out implies that a player has a contract, and refuses to play until his contract is redone.
Grant has no contract. He's unsigned. As of right now, Green Bay is paying him as much money as they're paying me....nothing. This isn't a case where a guy is playing for 500k for year, has a big game, and says "ok, now 500k isn't enough anymore and even though I put my name on that dotted line, I want to change it".
He's a free agent. Unfortunately for him, he's an exclusive rights free agent, which puts him in a very bad spot.
Free Bagel wrote:What is all this nonsense about a hold out? A hold out implies that a player has a contract, and refuses to play until his contract is redone.
Grant has no contract. He's unsigned. As of right now, Green Bay is paying him as much money as they're paying me....nothing. This isn't a case where a guy is playing for 500k for year, has a big game, and says "ok, now 500k isn't enough anymore and even though I put my name on that dotted line, I want to change it".
He's a free agent. Unfortunately for him, he's an exclusive rights free agent, which puts him in a very bad spot.
I know, I keep saying the same thing. I guess since the 1 year tender is on the table and the Pack do have exclusive rights, it is almost the same as holding out in the last year of your deal. But you're right, it isn't really the same thing. I don't know when the 'exclusive rights' tag falls off, but eventually he does become a true free agent that can sign with another team. The problem with that is, who would sign him to a long term deal to start for their team? That is probably why the Packers think they can play hardball with him. But it's a bad move...Packers are making no friends with the fans right now, and I can't imagine the players (except Rodgers) feel very comfortable that they are under good management right now.
Exclusive-Rights 'tags' do not fall off until the player is under tender/contract that covers the third season. If Grant does not come to some sort of resolution with the Packers they can prevent him from ever playing in the NFL. He has no real rights. Exclusive-Rights Free Agents are not really free agents. It's not the same as Restricted and "Exclusive-Rights" is the operative word.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by buffalobillsrul2002 » Wed Jul 16, 2008 5:51 pm 
