June 1st Cuts/Pickups

SKINSnCANES · 05-31-2004, 08:34 PM

Heres an article on the June 1st cuts.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...len&id=1760925

Looks like Gardner is going to be back on the marker. How would you guys feel about Daryl Gardner being back on the Skins, mabye along with Joe Johnson we could have a pretty good, and completly knew defensive line.

Didnt Gardner get traded or picked up by the Bengals though, I thought we were talking about that a while back?

skins009 · 05-31-2004, 09:17 PM

he's already got a deal with the bengals. He's gonna sign with them.

Daseal · 06-01-2004, 07:35 AM

Incentive filled contracts. All I have to say!

]<ing · 06-01-2004, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daseal

Incentive filled contracts. All I have to say!

WORD!

I've been saying this for years now -- make it a standard across the board. It would be the saving grace for proffesional sports in general.

PERFORMANCE BASED SALARIES.

MTK · 06-01-2004, 09:48 AM

sounds great but try convincing the agents and the players, lol

SmootSmack · 06-01-2004, 10:31 AM

Incentive based contracts are an interesting theory, but how would you reward someone like say Randy Thomas? He had a pretty good year last year but you wouldn't know it the way the team played. There are no real stats associated with him. I guess you could say sacks allowed, or offensive stats. But that can't reflect entirely on him, can it?

Skins fan 44 · 06-01-2004, 10:55 AM

Incentive based? Although a great idea and should be done. There will always be a team that will pay extra to get a player and if it does not work out waive him. The XFL had the right idea, just tried to be too much of a circus.

]<ing · 06-01-2004, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

sounds great but try convincing the agents and the players, lol

I say, still give them a nice base, just not the obscene salaries they're making today.

What are they going to do, quit and bag groceries for $7 an hour?

Right now the players seem to have all of the power -- hell, they're getting coaches fired. The league needs to realize that there's no reason for it to be that way.

]<ing · 06-01-2004, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smootsmack

Incentive based contracts are an interesting theory, but how would you reward someone like say Randy Thomas? He had a pretty good year last year but you wouldn't know it the way the team played. There are no real stats associated with him. I guess you could say sacks allowed, or offensive stats. But that can't reflect entirely on him, can it?

Create team, as well as individual incentives.

Hogskin · 06-01-2004, 03:18 PM

Well, incentives have some interesting plusses, but could end up being a real detriment. You would have players playing ONLY for the incentives that bring the $$, not caring about the aspects of their game that do not reward (and there will ALWAYS be some aspects that can not be quantified). Then you also would have guys being much more negative than they already are if they did not get enough time on the field. Every team would have 15 Corey Dillons. The NFL is the only pro sport with a structure that is extremely effective and successful. I say, don't tamper with it. I think the NFL owners realize this, also. (If it ain't broke, don't fix it). ML Baseball and NBA are the sports with salary issues that really need fixing.

SmootSmack · 06-01-2004, 03:43 PM

I think hogskin brings up a good point about playing time. Sometimes the game situation dictates that certain players won't play. Example you're down 4 TDs you're probably not going to have your back pounding out 3 yards at a time running out the clock. Is that the running back's fault? Maybe

Truth be told even if I didn't agree with hogskin I'm not about to say it. I'd like to think I'm smart enough not to get on the wrong side of the man who owns possibly the coolest game room I've ever seen. His grandkids must feel like Ricky Stratton in Silver Spoons.

offiss · 06-01-2004, 04:38 PM

Gardner doesn't fit in with what gibb's is trying to accomplish, and that's guy's who are redskin's, which mean's a lot more than just physical talent, I also like the fact that gibb's has my boy Bett's backing up Portis, he obviously has an eye for talent!

Hogskin · 06-01-2004, 05:32 PM

Smack, thanks for the great plug, LOL. But anyone can disagree with my opinion any time they like, and it will not affect my opinion of them. As you've probably seen, I enjoy a good healthy "discussion" of different points of view, and will argue my points strenuously. I sure hope you make it to Alabama sometime. If so, be sure to stop in to see us in Hartselle. It would be great to have someone here who can talk Redskins!!!

Daseal · 06-01-2004, 07:38 PM

I think incentive based contracts should ONLY be given to those with big questions. Rookies, questionable personallity/injury history. I feel otherwise the owner and coach on certain teams could keep players from being paid too much. Say the RB gets an extra 3 mil if he get's 1700 yards. He's at 1650 for the last game, the team has no chance at the playoffs, the RB gets benched. I could see that problem coming up.

Not to mention, it promotes individual advancement, not team advancement. Only do incentive based contracts for people like Gardner that you're not sure how they'll act. As much as I hate to admit it (just kidding) I agree with Hogskin!

RedskinRat · 06-01-2004, 07:42 PM

Conversely most players have accelerator clauses for playoff games, Super Bowl games already so that should cover the team advancement. I can't imagine a pro player wanting to get his bonus at a detriment to the overall sucess of the team.

OK, I can, but it seems bassackwards.

05-31-2004, 08:34 PM	#1
SKINSnCANES Pro Bowl Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: New Jersey Age: 43 Posts: 5,455	June 1st Cuts/Pickups Heres an article on the June 1st cuts. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...len&id=1760925 Looks like Gardner is going to be back on the marker. How would you guys feel about Daryl Gardner being back on the Skins, mabye along with Joe Johnson we could have a pretty good, and completly knew defensive line. Didnt Gardner get traded or picked up by the Bengals though, I thought we were talking about that a while back? __________________ "I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis

06-01-2004, 10:31 AM	#6
SmootSmack Uncle Phil Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 45,256	Incentive based contracts are an interesting theory, but how would you reward someone like say Randy Thomas? He had a pretty good year last year but you wouldn't know it the way the team played. There are no real stats associated with him. I guess you could say sacks allowed, or offensive stats. But that can't reflect entirely on him, can it? __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

06-01-2004, 10:55 AM	#7
Skins fan 44 Impact Rookie Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Brazil, IN Age: 54 Posts: 883	Incentive based? Although a great idea and should be done. There will always be a team that will pay extra to get a player and if it does not work out waive him. The XFL had the right idea, just tried to be too much of a circus. __________________ HTTR!

06-01-2004, 03:18 PM	#10
Hogskin Impact Rookie Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Hartselle, Alabama Age: 84 Posts: 659	Well, incentives have some interesting plusses, but could end up being a real detriment. You would have players playing ONLY for the incentives that bring the $$, not caring about the aspects of their game that do not reward (and there will ALWAYS be some aspects that can not be quantified). Then you also would have guys being much more negative than they already are if they did not get enough time on the field. Every team would have 15 Corey Dillons. The NFL is the only pro sport with a structure that is extremely effective and successful. I say, don't tamper with it. I think the NFL owners realize this, also. (If it ain't broke, don't fix it). ML Baseball and NBA are the sports with salary issues that really need fixing. __________________ John Shaffer National Fantasy Sports Leagues, Inc. Home of "The BEST Game In Town" since 1990

06-01-2004, 03:43 PM	#11
SmootSmack Uncle Phil Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 45,256	I think hogskin brings up a good point about playing time. Sometimes the game situation dictates that certain players won't play. Example you're down 4 TDs you're probably not going to have your back pounding out 3 yards at a time running out the clock. Is that the running back's fault? Maybe Truth be told even if I didn't agree with hogskin I'm not about to say it. I'd like to think I'm smart enough not to get on the wrong side of the man who owns possibly the coolest game room I've ever seen. His grandkids must feel like Ricky Stratton in Silver Spoons. __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

05-31-2004, 09:17 PM	#2
skins009 Impact Rookie Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 528	he's already got a deal with the bengals. He's gonna sign with them.

06-01-2004, 07:35 AM	#3
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 42 Posts: 8,341	Incentive filled contracts. All I have to say!

06-01-2004, 09:48 AM	#5
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 52 Posts: 99,832	sounds great but try convincing the agents and the players, lol

06-01-2004, 04:38 PM	#12
offiss Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ] Age: 61 Posts: 3,097	Gardner doesn't fit in with what gibb's is trying to accomplish, and that's guy's who are redskin's, which mean's a lot more than just physical talent, I also like the fact that gibb's has my boy Bett's backing up Portis, he obviously has an eye for talent!

06-01-2004, 05:32 PM	#13
Hogskin Impact Rookie Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Hartselle, Alabama Age: 84 Posts: 659	Smack, thanks for the great plug, LOL. But anyone can disagree with my opinion any time they like, and it will not affect my opinion of them. As you've probably seen, I enjoy a good healthy "discussion" of different points of view, and will argue my points strenuously. I sure hope you make it to Alabama sometime. If so, be sure to stop in to see us in Hartselle. It would be great to have someone here who can talk Redskins!!! __________________ John Shaffer National Fantasy Sports Leagues, Inc. Home of "The BEST Game In Town" since 1990

06-01-2004, 07:38 PM	#14
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 42 Posts: 8,341	I think incentive based contracts should ONLY be given to those with big questions. Rookies, questionable personallity/injury history. I feel otherwise the owner and coach on certain teams could keep players from being paid too much. Say the RB gets an extra 3 mil if he get's 1700 yards. He's at 1650 for the last game, the team has no chance at the playoffs, the RB gets benched. I could see that problem coming up. Not to mention, it promotes individual advancement, not team advancement. Only do incentive based contracts for people like Gardner that you're not sure how they'll act. As much as I hate to admit it (just kidding) I agree with Hogskin!

06-01-2004, 07:42 PM	#15
RedskinRat Franchise Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: I'm in LA, trick! Posts: 8,700	Conversely most players have accelerator clauses for playoff games, Super Bowl games already so that should cover the team advancement. I can't imagine a pro player wanting to get his bonus at a detriment to the overall sucess of the team. OK, I can, but it seems bassackwards.

June 1st Cuts/Pickups

Locker Room Main Forum