obiken wrote:Makes sense, he knows that we will win the next 2 games, it all downside for him if he stays out.
c_hawkbob wrote:He ain't gonna fire his agent.
I actually think this was pretty shrewd in the long view;
- Kam and his agent were gambling that the Seahawks would lose these first two games without him, particularly since it was obvious from the schedule release that this was possibly our toughest two game stretch of the season ...
- During the holdout it comes out that Kam plays a much greater role in the overall structure and implementation of the defense than was previously thought. Earl was though to be the catalyst but even he admitted during the holdout that it was Kam that got him line up pre-snap.
- Now, after losing the first two games and having very pedestrian defensive rankings Kam will come back and against the next few opponents we'll look like the Legion of old again and his bargaining position is much improved.
- He's coming back with no concessions from the team right now, and having lost possibly more than a million in fines and lost wages, so the Team can claim a win here but the they are already saying they will look at restructuring his deal next year, and he will more than make up that difference on the new deal
It pisses me off that he cost us two games to set himself up for next years bargaining, but I couldn't be happier he's back and have to tip my hat to his agent after all.
depaashaas wrote:So...Now that he's back they have 54 players, who's going to get cut to make room for him?
depaashaas wrote:So...Now that he's back they have 54 players, who's going to get cut to make room for him?
depaashaas wrote:So...Now that he's back they have 54 players, who's going to get cut to make room for him?
Hawktown wrote:I would still bench him for a while, maybe even 3-4 weeks.
NorthHawk wrote:Here's an interesting take on what went on to start the holdout:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -2016-pay/
Hawktawk wrote:If that article is accurate, a huge if for sure, then it sounds like it was Schneider who was jerking Cam around and misled him. This might explain the seemingly mystifying behavior of a player nobody would have dreamed would do such a thing as hold out.
Distant Relative wrote:What I wonder about is if he is still not 100% after last years injury. It has always been in the back of my mind that he wasn't fully recovered coming into the season and was trying to get more coin cause he saw the writing on the wall. What I mean is....once you get injured bad enough it makes you think about your future and guaranteed money.
Just my thoughts. Regardless, to me something smells fishy.
Go Hawks!
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/seahawks/ ... hawks-com/
I will never understand the ire many seem to be hell bent on directing at any human being for asking for, or demanding a raise, as I would bet EVERY fan ( or damn close to it) have ALL done the SAME exact thing at some time in their lives.
Neither is unique, neither is the "bad guy"
HumanCockroach wrote:I will never understand the ire many seem to be hell bent on directing at any human being for asking for, or demanding a raise, as I would bet EVERY fan ( or damn close to it) have ALL done the SAME exact thing at some time in their lives. So many people get so incredibly hung up on the dollar amounts, that they lose site of that fact. Every person in this country, that has worked, whether for an hourly wage or a salary have entered into a contract. Verbal contracts ( ie I agree to work for x amount of dollars) are indeed contracts, and are recognized by law as such. So in essence every single person who has asked for, demanded and received a raise have "broken" their contract ( the original agreed upon compensation at the time of hire). This doesn't change, just because the amount is greater, or the contract agreed upon has a signature. Nor does a franchise place ANY importance upon that same contract whenever they see fit. Whether it be cutting the player, or forcing them to take a pay cut, or giving them an injury settlement as opposed to the agreed upon salary.
While people are busy getting bent out of shape over the "honor your word" or the " he makes millions to play a game" they COMPLETELY miss what is really happening, which has played out for the majority of people at one time or another. Kam went to his BOSS and asked for a raise, his BOSS said no, it would set a bad precedence, the EMPLOYEE said fine, then I don't want to work for you anymore. The ONLY difference is, because of the contract, said employee could not change companies within the same field, and was forced to resign himself to WORK under the original parameters of the AGREED upon compensation, or leave his field of expertise.
Neither is unique, neither is the "bad guy", the Seahawks did what they HAD to do, and Kam did what he felt was BEST for him, his family and his future. This is NOT war, it's football folks, and Kam is an employee, not a damn soldier. Employees quit, leave, call out sick, have personal matters, refuse to work for or under employers ALL the time, happens every day, across every field, and by most upset with him at one point or another.
HumanCockroach wrote:I will never understand the ire many seem to be hell bent on directing at any human being for asking for, or demanding a raise, as I would bet EVERY fan ( or damn close to it) have ALL done the SAME exact thing at some time in their lives. So many people get so incredibly hung up on the dollar amounts, that they lose site of that fact. Every person in this country, that has worked, whether for an hourly wage or a salary have entered into a contract. Verbal contracts ( ie I agree to work for x amount of dollars) are indeed contracts, and are recognized by law as such. So in essence every single person who has asked for, demanded and received a raise have "broken" their contract ( the original agreed upon compensation at the time of hire). This doesn't change, just because the amount is greater, or the contract agreed upon has a signature. Nor does a franchise place ANY importance upon that same contract whenever they see fit. Whether it be cutting the player, or forcing them to take a pay cut, or giving them an injury settlement as opposed to the agreed upon salary.
While people are busy getting bent out of shape over the "honor your word" or the " he makes millions to play a game" they COMPLETELY miss what is really happening, which has played out for the majority of people at one time or another. Kam went to his BOSS and asked for a raise, his BOSS said no, it would set a bad precedence, the EMPLOYEE said fine, then I don't want to work for you anymore. The ONLY difference is, because of the contract, said employee could not change companies within the same field, and was forced to resign himself to WORK under the original parameters of the AGREED upon compensation, or leave his field of expertise.
Neither is unique, neither is the "bad guy", the Seahawks did what they HAD to do, and Kam did what he felt was BEST for him, his family and his future. This is NOT war, it's football folks, and Kam is an employee, not a damn soldier. Employees quit, leave, call out sick, have personal matters, refuse to work for or under employers ALL the time, happens every day, across every field, and by most upset with him at one point or another.
Hawktown wrote:I realize that the NFL is not like "the real world" but I could apply the rest of your post to "the real world" where business is not just about money but being the top dog also. In my business, there are few who can produce at a "high level" and there ARE many I would NOT let work for me for many reasons, even if they are more qualified than what is left out there. There are also few opportunities in lots of jobs out there to be the top dog.
BTW, I didn't say get someone else, I would just like to see him benched a couple games. Kam IS an asset, I also think we can do it without him though it would be tough.
Users browsing this forum: MackStrongIsMyHero and 105 guests