|
Hey Beers - I think we are actually agreeing. Assuming that Vick's contract contained the conduct detrimental to team or league clause, and the amount the Falcons are after somehow accounts for time played prior etc. then I agree with the ruling. All I have been (trying to) saying is that if there is no such clause then he should keep all of it. Also, I fully understand the reasoning behind the big up front bonuses - but the team's reasoning for going that route is irrelevant, just like it's too damned bad if a player signs it without reading the fine print. Personally, I am sick of the shenanigans on both sides - players getting away with crap and taking the big pay without giving a hoot about the fact that they represent a team and a league and are heroes to kids (whether they should be or not doesn't matter - the fact is they are) and I'm just as sick of owners/teams who dole out the big dollars, pretend not to see half of what the players are doing and then become holier than thou when public opinion breaks against a player. Without in any way intending to defend Vick - how come he's getting nailed (as he should) but so many others have gotten away with crap? I'm also sick of teams getting it both ways regarding bonuses - on one hand, they argue it's a signing bonus and should be averaged for cap purposes only, and then they turn around and want some of it back when things don't go as planned. Maybe it's the NFL at fault for treating bonuses the way they do - when you get to it, it's really about trying to cheat the salary cap until a players F*s up and then its about trying to get spent cash back. Despite the legalize, contract clauses etc., I just disagree with the spirit of the whole thing. Having said that - let's not lose sight of the actual criminal here; for the life of me I can't understand why Vick would take the huge risk he did by being involved in and actually financing illegal activity. Guess he's just plain stupid.
|