09-03-2023, 04:48 AM
(09-03-2023, 02:58 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Because he was colluded against by two groups who has absolutely zero interest in his best interests (when he was 12 years old) to remove his ability to negotiate for his pay, negotiate length of contract, and his ability to negotiate for a raise for the first 3 years of his career. Sam Bradford was the 1st overall pick in 2010 and he got $78m or $13m/yr when the cap was only $120m to Burrow's $36m or $9m/yr when the cap was $198m.
He's vastly outperformed what he has been paid and is now eligible for a pay raise and the understanding in place is that if a guy has proven himself to be great after 3 years he is to get a raise. Heck, there's even measures specifically put into place in the CBA that allow for fine forgiveness of guys who hold out after their third year while on rookie contracts because if you're good enough to hold out, you're generally good enough that you should get paid.
The fact that he's not holding out, holding in (I am assuming the calf wasn't/isn't a hold-in), or making a spectacle of it means he is still operating in good faith. If you want to maintain any semblance of a good culture with your organization you can't show that guys who become the face of your franchise, lead you to a Super Bowl, perform excellently, and make the franchise an absolute boatload of money, won't be treated in good faith in return. Players need to see that when players are making the franchise money and doing very well, they are rewarded.
So you also agree it wouldn't be fine for him to not play, otherwise he's not acting in good faith. I would understand if he was going into year 5 with no contract following, like the Bosa situation.
