Those are all very good points..the bad precedent seems to be the most prevalent issue. In addition, with all of this going on out in the open, it doesn't set a good example for the younger players so his leadership qualities are compromised in that regard. That being said, I still don't think we have a viable option to replace him so its really a catch 22.. I have confidence in tangini to make the right choice though.
i think we need to add a "compromise" option in this.. I still think there is some room to pay him some, but not the full amount he's asking for and still retain his services.
I know most disagree with me but I think we should pay him. 1) He's our best guard IMO. 2) He's also our backup center. 3) He's been an excellent tutor for Brick and Mangold. 4) The amount he's asking for is relatively low and wouldn't effect our cap long term at all. I understand the argument about precedence and that certainly has merit. It's too bad that we don't have prior examples under this regime of refusing to give players big paychecks like the Patriots have because I believe that in the Patriots case they would be able to get away with a move like this citing the above reasons as why they're making an exception. Unfortunately we're not in that position and giving him his money would not be an exception because this is the first incident we know of. This would be difficult to explain to all the other players agents looking for more bucks. I understand that. If we had more depth on the o-line I'd be OK with letting an aging vet sit the bench or be released but we don't.
pete is a vet on the team and he is a huge asset and to be honest if you look at our pay checks that we pay to the jet players there are not that large compared to the other teams and leauges in the sports world and what lineman due to there bodies through the years and what paul has done to the reitiries he needs to get what he can sometimes you have to think about the families also not to metioned you have to honor a contract us fans give to much money to the goddamn pencil pushers and not to the ones who make it happend.
What are the odd's that someone else on the line gets injured? Are we better off with him or without him? Can we trade him for a conditional pick in next years draft? Tough call I say keep him unless he rocks the boat. I'll bet Herm will give us a least a second round pick for him.
Expand the poll to: Keep him current salary Keep him at higher salary Cut him Trade him Culpepper him (Keep the rights to his contract and ban him from the facility)
y should we pay him anything more? He signed his contract only 2 years ago. He got a very good signing bonus. He didn?t play better than expectet. His contract was a "normal" contract, not frontloaded at all. And he?s way overrated here. The reason he thinks he can get more is not that he feels, he deserves more, it?s cuz he thinks the market is dry, and he may get more. He?s just trying to extort (is this the right word) us. If we could get a fourth round, or make another good deal, like him and a 5th for smiley or faneca, or somone else, get rid of him. If not, let him sit. He?ll probably brake in during camp if we stay hard here. After all that i hope we can trade him, cuz i really don?t want him around anymore.
The answer isnt pay or cut. He signed a contract and has to play. If he holds out, then start handing out fines until he plays. Then cut him in the offseason.
We have holes / question marks on the DL ,,, now this, It's gonna be years before we will challenge for the SB ring at this point. Just being negative today.
I don't want to return to the Darkside. I think things will look far better by training camp. Fingers crossed!
We didn't upgrade the DL of htr ball so we need to to AT LEAST maintain stability (if no upgrade) on the OL of the trenches, Give him a little raise ans be done with it. What good does an upgrade at RB if we have a shakey OL?
