Quote:Don't you think having scheme stability has an impact on a player's earnings?

 

Say a 25 year old DE signs here this offseason for 3 years.  Included in the deal are incentives.

 

After the first year, Bradley is fired and the scheme changes to something that does not fit his skills.

 

Not only does he potentially miss out on the incentives in year 2 and 3, if the new regime finds him obsolete, he could even miss out on his base salary if he is cut.

 

Beyond that, should he peddle his wares elsewhere, his drop in productivity/release is going to be held against him in any future negotiations with other teams.

 

I get the sentiment that FAs are smart enough to see the extension for what it is.

 

But there are other considerations, financial and otherwise, that support the re-signing.

Except if Gus is gone next year if the team doesn't succeed, the whole scheme thing still doesn't matter!  Especially if a Free Agent looks at the team and sees that it doesn't look good.


Gus did nothing to earn this extension.  What kind of message does that send to Free Agents?  The fact that we're giving a coach an extension after a 5-11 season.  Don't we want players who want to win?  Not just guys looking to get paid.

---