(09-18-2019, 03:25 AM)JackCity Wrote: It'd good to see players using their leverage to do what they want.

The NFL plucks rookies from college and locks them down for 4/5 years on cost controlled wages in places they may not want to go. I'm 100% for any player using his leverage to where he wants to go, it's up to the team to provide enough value and worth for the player to stay.  

Everyone likes to compare the NFL to a real job when it suits them but if you look at the reverse of that, ordinary people wouldn't stay in a bad situation with bad pay if they had the power to pursue the alternative.

The NFL does not "pluck rookies from college".  You do realize that the draft is optional for players... right?

If a player is drafted by a team from a "place they may not want to go" they do have the option to not sign a contract.  Nobody is forcing them to go to a team/city.

I would hardly call a rookie salary "bad pay", even if the player is drafted in the lower rounds.

(09-18-2019, 06:47 AM)JackCity Wrote:

(09-18-2019, 06:24 AM)Rico Wrote: Yet they always insist on long-term term contracts.  Who's fault is that if it turns into a bad situation?

Well what do teams do when players no longer serve their purpose? They cut them or trade them, even if there's years left on the deal. 

So when a team no longer serves a player I don't have a problem with them seeking something else. And remember, only valuable players can pursue this method. Nobody will give a damn if a 3rd string guard demands a trade. It only matters if you've performed at a high level.

An employer is supposed to "serve" an employee?  I think it's the other way around.  The employer (the team) is paying the employee (the player) for his services, not the other way around.  The player is always free to "seek something else" once they have fulfilled their contract obligation.

---