Tannehill signed?

Well, for the most part yes… players are responsible for their own dismissal. And I can assure you, as a young QB… the team isnt going to dismiss a QB if hes good and performing well. That would be illogical, especially considering the value of the position in today’s game. Sure, there are situations where a team just is just so stacked at a position that they get cut in a numbers game due to just not having enough roster spots at a position… but for the most part… if you are playing great, you arent getting cut. Most of the time players are cut are either A) They arent performing well enough… or B) Their contract is too inflated and the team can get more bang for their buck elsewhere. If players were paid on performance, no one would get cut b/c their play didn’t match their contract b/c, in that situation, their contract would match their play.

Now of course, again… this entire concept is not based in reality. Besides the fact that the NFLPA would NEVER agree to such a thing… I cant imagine the nightmare it would be to try to implement a salary cap where the earnings of players would be unknown going into that season.

Well sure, don’t cut him if you don’t want him to double dip. But the whole point I was making is that players that suck should be cut and deservingly so. And in terms of deserving or earning the money… which is what I was talking about… the player isnt living up to their end of the deal. I can assure you that the Fins would be thrilled to be paying him every penny possible if he was playing great and earning every cent of it… and that Tannehill will be solely responsible for his own dismissal.

 

Yep, I mentioned that earlier. That was the whole point. In this hypothetical system, no player would ever be underpaid or "over perform" for a contract b/c essentially, the contracts would be entirely incentive based.

 

When did I "rail" on anyone? I am not railing Ryan b/c if he has the ability to get it in his contract, why shouldnt he push for it? I wouldnt blame him for trying to grab every cent he can, b/c I know I sure would if in that situation. And I'm not railing on the Fins b/c the payment structure that is in place goes beyond just the Fins, as it is league wide and has been collectively bargained upon between the league and the players union.


I just said that I dont understand how a player could logically argue that they should have that in their contract and that they deserve money that they arent earning on the field for that club.

 

I can see where you are coming from with that, and it is a good point. But arent these rookie deals still having incentives built in to help balance out said structural inequities if he is performing well? Or did those get taken out in the new CBA? I do know that there were never any negative incentives that reduce money if not playing or playing poorly... just positive incentives to further reward good play.

 

Ah ok, didnt know they removed them in the new deals under this CBA. I guess that was the trade off for making at least 3 and maybe 4 of the years fully guaranteed instead of just the signing bonus?

 

Definitely that as well, lol.