sure.....do you allow for this excuse for a QB who has never had a Hopkins at his disposal?
then your issue is with the CBA.....no need to make the factually incorrect statement a team is not honoring the contract when they release and don't pay a player (other than the guarantee).
are you just messing with us?
cool....but that's different than you not understanding/accepting the contract is being honored per the terms of the contract whether we think it's fair or not.
Nope. Because the offense going into the season is predicated on having a WR of his caliber dictating coverage matchups. So when he goes out you can’t redo OTAs and training camp and rework a new system.
are you too old to try to become a civil rights attorney? I’m sure the world needs another one. You make it sound like the system is so messed up that a court of law would strike it down. Seems like a worthy cause for you to pursue.
OK...sure.
My issue is with unfair conditions. You placing blame on the players themselves for that condition is misguided.
If the conditions that create the contract are by their nature unfair then the contract itself is unfair.
I'm not sure he's top 10 but no question a case can be made for that. He does have some leverage, too. In addition, maybe threatening to play baseball is something he can use (unless in his contract that he cannot play baseball).
I hate lawyers. Scored a 168 on my LSATs but worked two summers in my uncle’s firm and discovered it wasn’t for me.
I’ve never struggled to understand that point. I’ll invoke an analogy. Legality and what’s just are two entirely different dynamics. This is tantamount to it being illegal to harbor a runaway slave because he or she was legally recognized as property of another. That didn’t make the dynamic just.
Yet in the 3 games McCoy played without Hopkins (weeks 9-11) he managed to go 68-90 for 684 yards, 3 TDs and 1 INT. He had 2 elite level performances of the 3 games. The other was bad.
That might be your issue , but you made the factually incorrect statement ( a number of times ) that the team is not honoring the contract by releasing the player and not paying out any money that has not been guaranteed when, in fact, the contract states the team may release the player and not pay out any money that has not been guaranteed.
yet the players agreed to it. Weird.
That’s not in Murray’s control. They gave Connor far more carries than they gave him with Murray behind center. The criticism you’re putting forth seems like it should be directed at Kingsbury.
They aren’t “honoring” the contract. They’re exercising a legal out that has been cooked into the contract so that they don’t have to honor the spirit of said contract. That’s a one way condition and one of numerous reasons as to why this system is slanted and unjust and why it’s not a reflection of a players character when they hold out while under contract.
you've never struggled to understand it but said the team is not honoring the contract when they release and don't pay their player?
you tried to say the offense/QB cannot function without Hopkins. You were wrong.
Maybe we need another slave comparison because I'm sure the slaves had a CBA and a say in how it was constructed.
