In late 2004, Mike Vick signed a blockbuster 10-year, $130-million contract with the Atlanta Falcons, who wanted him to retire as a part of their team. (Not right away, but eventually, when he's done playing.) Now, according to NFL.com, his contract is already heading toward restructuring:
Quarterback Michael Vick has bailed out the Falcons before -- and he could be on the verge of doing it again.The Falcons and Vick have been engaged in talks to restructure the quarterback's contract to provide Atlanta with more of the salary-cap space it needs.
Of course, both sides are waiting to see what happens with the CBA first, before signing off on anything. But Vick is ready and waiting to do what it takes to help the Falcons get back to the top of the NFC South.
Leaving out for the moment what I think of Vick as a player (both the good and the bad), this whole restructuring thing is getting more than a little silly. What's the point of having a press conference and wasting everyone's time and energy signing the man to massive contract if it's going to have to be restructured less than 18 months later to ensure the team comes in under the salary cap?
Gregg Easterbrook has written voluminously on the subject of NFL contracts, extensions, and guaranteed money. I'm starting to understand where he's coming from.
Gone are the days when an NFL player could sign with one team and spend his career with them. To become a franchise player, you have to constantly redo deals, sometimes more than once a year. The term "franchise player" has changed anyway, from the Brett Favre type (the player that plays for one team his whole career and is vital to that team's success) to a player that is offered a guaranteed amount of money for a single year just to ensure that he doesn't leave the team, get enticed away, or end up on the trading block.
A few years ago, one of my friends suggested that, to make the game more interesting, players get re-drafted each year, a la a gigantic, recycling game of fantasy football. With the way contracts are being structured, restructured, changed, or disregarded these days, we're almost in that world already.we're almost in that world already.
(Crossposted from Multiple Mentality)
Comments (2)
My question is why they eve... (Below threshold)1. Posted by mrjerz | February 24, 2006 12:36 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
My question is why they even call them contracts. Nothing is guaranteed, unless the guy is designated"franchise" and doesn't each team get just one of those. The Terrell Owens deal is a fine example of why the NFL contract situation is stupid. You sign the guy, give him a huge upfront bonus (because that's what the player wants, the guaranteed cash), and he goes stupid on you. Then you're hosed.
1. Posted by mrjerz | February 24, 2006 12:36 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 24, 2006 12:36
2. Posted by Taz | February 25, 2006 9:11 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I understand the contract / CBA situation to be about revenue sharing. At the beginning of last season, the NFL wanted to get control of Fantasy Football & "share" in the revenue it was generating.
Do you think this new revenue sharing / CBA glitch has anything to do with a Fantasy Football "tax"?
I recently was polled about Fantasy Football; questions like how many leagues, money spent, etc.
2. Posted by Taz | February 25, 2006 9:11 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 25, 2006 09:11