Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotus
I disagree. I've seen many players go for longer deals because they like the financial security. Same thing with unhappiness the franchise tags - the ever-present threat of injury means that a longer-term deal provides financial security in a way that a franchise tag does not. In this way NFL players are not much different than the rest of us: don't we all want our bosses to provide us with a job not just for today, but for years down the road as well?
|
Sure, and I don't mean to argue the point really because it is not particularly significant, but the only thing guaranteed in an NFL contract is the signing bonus (or other guarantees written into the contract). You could have a 100-year contract, but if you got hurt and the team cut you then the only money you would ever see would be the signing bonus. So there is no security in a longer deal, there is only security in a larger signing bonus. The two are not entirely unrelated since a longer deal would allow a team to pro-rate a signing bonus over more years and thus give more money up front, but just having a longer deal would not give you any more security.