I don't understand how fans don't get why players in the NFL do this. They have absolutely no guarantee of a career in the NFL. The only thing they can get is guaranteed money. The team can cut them for any reason at just about any time. The "contract" they sign is only one way, so why shouldn't they go after more money if they can?
If he holds out, the Bears won't pay him. Option 3 won't happen. Neither will option 1 (even if it did, Bears wouldn't have to pay, and in the NFL, salary is decided by games. If you sit out 1 game, that's 1/16th of your yearly salary). Urlacher won't bite his nose to spite his face. You are missing a very likely option, and probably the very reason he's holding out - the sign-and-trade. Urlacher, the Bears and Team X all agree to a new deal while the Bears and Team X work out a trade. The Bears bring all these contract problems on themselves.
I can understand some players doing it - ones who are not making $60M on a current contract. The team can cut them for any reason, but Urlacher knew this before and that is why he got his guaranteed money in his current contract. Also, if the Bears were to cut Urlacher, there would be 27 teams trying to sign him. He is not someone who is hurt by the rule that the NFL can cut a play for pretty much any reason. When Urlacher made the deal on this contract, he knew that the cap would not stay the same. He chose to go for the 9 year deal to get more guaranteed money and have some security. It's not like he entered this long term contract without knowing the consequences. He could have chosen a shorter term and been negotiating with any team for whatever price he wanted right now. That would have been a bigger risk, because he would have gotten less guaranteed money and would have gotten significantly less money had he played poorly or been injured. Instead he chose the security of a long-term deal but wants to back out.
SN is right regarding the difference between a player currently under contract and a draftee holding out. Urlacher got his guaranteed money. He signed this contract to play for nine years under the contract in exchange for the guaranteed money he got at the front end. This kind of holdout is not nearly the same as a rookie holding out. I am always 100% in favor of a rookie holding out if he's getting lowballed. This is very different.
I'm fine with agreeing to disagree, but I have absolutely no qualms with trying to renegotiate a deal in the NFL
info on the "landmark", "blockbuster" 2003 deal here:The Link A few things: 1. That original deal was structured to help spread out some of the $13MM signing bonus. 2. The "franchise" tag price of a LB in 2008 is $7.2MM. Urlacher will make $3.95MM ($4MM if he doesn't miss the workouts) Urlacher has a legitimate beef. Last year, he was the 11th highest paid LB (by salary cap hit). Considering this year's free agent season and change in salary cap, he's going to be getting paid very average. On the flip side, he turns 30 in 11 days. he's on the way down, not up. He was once one of the highest paid LBs. He will probably get a little more than what he's getting now, but he shouldn't be getting crazy money again. NFL contracts are a joke. Players don't want long term contracts, they just want guaranteed money. They sign long term contracts to help massage the numbers under the salary cap.
Wasn't he one of the 'teammates' giving Cedric crap (and stiff retribution) for holding out his rookie year? Seems a tad hypocritical to me. Hope Cedric can give him a nice little payback hit when he gets back on the field.
NFL contracts are not contracts as you typically think of contracts. Personally I would like to see more of a golf/tennis style of payment in team sports. You win, you get paid. You lose, you get nothing, or next to nothing. That would make things a little more interesting, especially in basketball. Those guys mail it in for about 70 of the 82 regular season games.
No ACL - Yes, they could have cut him. That's why he negotiated for what was, at the time, good guaranteed money. I'm not 100% against Urlacher in this, not nearly. But it is not close to the same thing as a rookie holdout. A contract has been signed, and even though NFL contracts suck, he didn't have to sign it. Light years apart. Hagy - Bad idea in team sports due to competitive balance concerns that most leagues have. You would essentially end up with all the best players on one team in the long run so that they would be guaranteed to win 70-80 games and the championship.
He does not have a criminal record or a sordid past so you can scratch the Cowboys off as suitors. There is one of his 4. When he gets much older and has only one year left in his career, if that, the Redskins can go after him and offer him huge money and a huge bonus. So there is two.
Is it possible that he just listed 27 as a generic number, meaning all teams would want him? Does Hornfans really have to get ******* clarification on what he meant by 27??
Maybe not the site but maybe the person who responded does. I think the Raiders would be the third team because it would make sense to pick him up and he would help the team. They can have none of that under Al Davis' watch. So now we need the fourth team.
I will pile on the player in these circumstance when the teams stop cutting players they signed to big deals. They cannot have it both ways. You want a player to honor his contract? Fine. Make sure the owners when they sign the guy to 8 years 70 million honor it too rather than simply cutting him 2 years into the deal. Under the courrent scheme you gotta get every dollar you can right now because they will cut you as soon as your cap number is too high.
