Palmer vs. Smith

[MW49ers5]

What??? You're not going to throw in a pack of gum??? That's a deal breaker

Agreed! No Gum - No Deal!

 

[sayheykid1]

I always pick a second team to follow (secondarily root for against everyone but us) every year - this year it's the Bengals (except against us) because I hate Carson Palmer's stance. I went to USC so I liked him until now. Some people can't blame him but I do - not for them losing but for him quitting. Describe it however you like, even perhaps justify it a bit, but he quit.

I see your point but I also understand why a player would want to have similar options as the team has in regards to honoring a contract.

 

[MHSL82]

I see your point but I also understand why a player would want to have similar options as the team has in regards to honoring a contract.

I'm looking at it on a perspective of competition in regard's to being an athlete. As an athlete, he has only demanded a trade because he doesn't think he can win = quitter. I know he's quits because his team doesn't have help, but there are other ways of handling the situation than quitting. It appears that he acted too quickly anyway. His team won 2 of the last three games last season, losing to Baltimore by 6.They've started out 3-2 this year on a team that may have beat us if he performed better than a rookie and lost by 2 this season for the other loss. With him, they could be 5-2 or 6-1 in the last 7 games. The next three are winnable, though he didn't know the Colts would be without Manning (he made the demand before the schedule release/lockout?). Potentially 9-1, though last season doesn't count to this year's record. Having said that, he doesn't want to play to win 6-8 games and miss the playoffs every year. Don't like it? Do something about it, work hard like Alex did. Don't get what you want? Tough, at least you tried until your obligation was over. Maybe he shouldn't have signed so long? (Though turning that money down isn't expected by me)

When he signs the contract, he signs away those "similar options as the team has in regards to honoring a contract". Teams act legally within the contracts, they aren't breaching the contract. It's a term that is built in there to give them flexibility. Granted, teams will always be in superior position, but if he doesn't want that option for the team, then that has to be insisted on in negotiations. He won't get it, but he does have the option to not sign. I agree he is stuck if that's his principle, but what are you going to do. The quaranteed money is part compensation/protection for that sacrifice.

 

[sayheykid1]

I'm looking at it on a perspective of competition in regard's to being an athlete. As an athlete, he has only demanded a trade because he doesn't think he can win = quitter. I know he's quits because his team doesn't have help, but there are other ways of handling the situation than quitting. It appears that he acted too quickly anyway. His team won 2 of the last three games last season, losing to Baltimore by 6.They've started out 3-2 this year on a team that may have beat us if he performed better than a rookie and lost by 2 this season for the other loss. With him, they could be 5-2 or 6-1 in the last 7 games. The next three are winnable, though he didn't know the Colts would be without Manning (he made the demand before the schedule release/lockout?). Potentially 9-1, though last season doesn't count to this year's record. Having said that, he doesn't want to play to win 6-8 games and miss the playoffs every year. Don't like it? Do something about it, work hard like Alex did. Don't get what you want? Tough, at least you tried until your obligation was over. Maybe he shouldn't have signed so long? (Though turning that money down isn't expected by me)

When he signs the contract, he signs away those "similar options as the team has in regards to honoring a contract". Teams act legally within the contracts, they aren't breaching the contract. It's a term that is built in there to give them flexibility. Granted, teams will always be in superior position, but if he doesn't want that option for the team, then that has to be insisted on in negotiations. He won't get it, but he does have the option to not sign. I agree he is stuck if that's his principle, but what are you going to do. The quaranteed money is part compensation/protection for that sacrifice.

I can't argue with that

 

[Mozart'sGhost]

At this point in the season, I think every team is accepting what they have at the QB position. You see that with Gerrard still available. I'm not sure if anyone will take a serious look at Palmer until after the season. Probably a pre-draft trade or maybe right after the draft?

To the 49ers specifically. I don't see how anyone could be this foolish. Trading for Palmer would send the signal that they have zero confidence in Alex Smith and probably have a very negative impact on the offense. Who trades for a QB when the one you have has helped guide the team to a 4-1 record by doing exactly what the coaching staff asks of him?

Like 4bee said, this person suggesting the trade doesn't seem to know what they are talking about as far as current events go, just basing this whole idea on 3-4 years ago.

I don't think Carson Palmer will find a job this season. Brown wants to punish him so he'll sit but it would be tough to plug him into someone's lineup mid-season anyway. I hope Smith continues to play well and the 49ers keep him around. If nothing else, its a good story.

 

[imac_21]

I see your point but I also understand why a player would want to have similar options as the team has in regards to honoring a contract.

Take it up with the union during CBA discussions. The union agreed to the rules the league operates by.

 

[sayheykid1]

Take it up with the union during CBA discussions. The union agreed to the rules the league operates by.

I am not sure why I would do that I just said that I get why a player would feel like holding out or demanding a trade in the NFL.
About the NFLPA, it is really weak and gets steamrolled by the owners repeatedly.

 

[sayheykid1]

double post

 

[imac_21]

I am not sure why I would do that I just said that I get why a player would feel like holding out or demanding a trade in the NFL.
About the NFLPA, it is really weak and gets steamrolled by the owners repeatedly.

Sorry, I meant the players should take it up with the union. The union agreed to the structure that the league operates under. They allow the non-guaranteed contracts which allow them to be cut at any point and they allow the situations like Palmer's where the player is essentially indentured to the team. Palmer doesn't have a leg to stand on. The rules haven't changed for nearly 20 years. He knew what he was getting into.

 

[yossarian]

Sorry, I meant the players should take it up with the union. The union agreed to the structure that the league operates under. They allow the non-guaranteed contracts which allow them to be cut at any point and they allow the situations like Palmer's where the player is essentially indentured to the team. Palmer doesn't have a leg to stand on. The rules haven't changed for nearly 20 years. He knew what he was getting into.

I don't hear Palmer saying that he was treated unfairly by the Bengals in not trading him, he just didn't want to play for them anymore and had said repeatedly (as much as I can remember), that he'd rather retire than play for that organization anymore. He has enough cash not to have to work again except on his own terms. There are no demands that I read about that the Bengals should trade him. He knew Mike Brown's reputation and knew Brown wouldn't trade him in part because Brown would be opening the floodgates to other Bengals who might want out. It sounds like he made a rational decision that he didn't want to play for them at all, was prepared to retire if that's what it took, and is now living with his decision.

 

[imac_21]

I don't hear Palmer saying that he was treated unfairly by the Bengals in not trading him, he just didn't want to play for them anymore and had said repeatedly (as much as I can remember), that he'd rather retire than play for that organization anymore. He has enough cash not to have to work again except on his own terms. There are no demands that I read about that the Bengals should trade him. He knew Mike Brown's reputation and knew Brown wouldn't trade him in part because Brown would be opening the floodgates to other Bengals who might want out. It sounds like he made a rational decision that he didn't want to play for them at all, was prepared to retire if that's what it took, and is now living with his decision.

When the Palmer situation first started he was demanding a trade, then said he would retire if they didn't trade him. Whenever a player tries to flex his muscles against his team the idea that teams can cut people at any point but the players can't quit. This is something that came up early in the Palmer situation, and sayhey mentioned it in this thread.

As far as I'm concerned, players have no right to complain about the current situation since they have agreed to it.

 

[tallglassofwater007]

I think players have the right to complain. If a player is signed he is expected to play out his contract, and work his ass off to get better and do anything in his power to make the team better. The same should be expected of the owners. But then the Bengals bring in a bunch of head cases every year. If I was him, having to deal with Chad Johnson all those years and then T.O., I might have quit too. It sounds like we have a bunch of happy ending Rudy's on these boards. If you are unhappy at your job, and you don't feel they are bettering the situation, would you just sit there and take it?? If I am unhappy at a job I would quit. Life is too short. Football is a job. Love of the game and all that is second. It may not be what people want to hear but it's the truth.

 

[imac_21]

I think players have the right to complain. If a player is signed he is expected to play out his contract, and work his ass off to get better and do anything in his power to make the team better. The same should be expected of the owners. But then the Bengals bring in a bunch of head cases every year. If I was him, having to deal with Chad Johnson all those years and then T.O., I might have quit too. It sounds like we have a bunch of happy ending Rudy's on these boards. If you are unhappy at your job, and you don't feel they are bettering the situation, would you just sit there and take it?? If I am unhappy at a job I would quit. Life is too short. Football is a job. Love of the game and all that is second. It may not be what people want to hear but it's the truth.

Are you contending that the Bengals were not trying to improve while he was there? The players have the option to quit. However, they don't have the option to seek employment with other franchises in the NFL should they quit. That's because of the CBA, which the union agreed to. I have no issue with Palmer retiring. I have no problem with Barry Sanders retiring in the 90s because he didn't believe in what the Lions were doing.

However, if Palmer, or anyone, thinks he should be free to seek employment with other teams, they're wrong.

I also have issue with Palmer not filing his retirement papers. He said if the Bengals didn't trade him, he would retire. Well, they haven't traded him. The deadline is Tuesday, I assume on Wednesday he'll file his papers.

 

[yossarian]

I don't have a problem with Palmer using whatever leverage he thinks he has to seek a trade. He knew going into this that it was not likely to succeed given Mike Brown is running the team. Despite the fact that the contracts are only guaranteed on one side players in the past have tried to force trades with varying degrees of success. The only problem I have is when one side or the other tries to make it a moral issue somehow instead of what it is, a business relationship where one side or the other is trying to use what they can to get what they think is a good or fair deal. For example, if Palmer were to come out and say Brown was treating him unfairly in refusing to trade him I would be bothered by that. People break contracts all the time because they make a decision that the contract is more onerous than paying the consequences -- it's not a moral failing in the business world, it shouldn't be seen as a moral failing here just because it's sports.

 

[tallglassofwater007]

Are you contending that the Bengals were not trying to improve while he was there? The players have the option to quit. However, they don't have the option to seek employment with other franchises in the NFL should they quit. That's because of the CBA, which the union agreed to. I have no issue with Palmer retiring. I have no problem with Barry Sanders retiring in the 90s because he didn't believe in what the Lions were doing.

However, if Palmer, or anyone, thinks he should be free to seek employment with other teams, they're wrong.

I also have issue with Palmer not filing his retirement papers. He said if the Bengals didn't trade him, he would retire. Well, they haven't traded him. The deadline is Tuesday, I assume on Wednesday he'll file his papers.

I'm not saying they weren't trying to get better, I'm just saying that maybe in his eyes he didn't feel that way. He wanted a trade because he wanted a fresh start somewhere. He never filed his papers because he probably thought/ hoped they would eventually trade him. He has the luxury of being able to retire.

I agree that he shouldn't be able to go look for a new team, but the Bengals hurt themselves by not trading him. Now he is gone and they get nothing. I think I am on Palmers side on this one. It sucks for the team and fans... but I'm putting myself in his shoes and thinking if I was miserable going to work everyday I would want to make a change.