|
|
Post by The River Assassin on Feb 11, 2009 14:56:45 GMT -5
The one day contract is the gayest of the gay. If he didn't want to go in a Jet he shouldn't have come back. Same goes for all the other HOFs that have done it.
|
|
fischer
honorary peso (chingador*)
Posts: 16,271
|
Post by fischer on Feb 11, 2009 15:01:46 GMT -5
I have never wasted any time worrying about it.
Like I said, if its good for both parties involved and the league (which it is) then they should do it.
|
|
sully
honorary peso (chingador*)
Posts: 13,045
|
Post by sully on Feb 11, 2009 15:35:34 GMT -5
The one day contract is the gayest of the gay. If he didn't want to go in a Jet he shouldn't have come back. Same goes for all the other HOFs that have done it. I could not agree more. He should have never flip-flopped in the first place. Now, he's tarnished his legacy, and created a similar situation as Emmitt in Phoenix. |
|
|
|
Post by Ticket Mouse on Feb 11, 2009 15:42:03 GMT -5
Oh they knew they couldn't. I just don't see the sanity in letting CP go for nothing and replacing him with an old QB with shoulder trouble who MIGHT give you two years. He's a HOFer but has to learn a completely new offense (and he struggled to find a rhythm for most of the season). You could have at least got something for CP. Now you gave away a former 1st round pick for nothing (who got picked up by a division rival and led them to the playoffs), you have no QB, and a coach lost his job and now has to live in Cleveland (that's the tragedy of it all).
|
|
|
|
Post by P. Marf on Feb 11, 2009 16:03:44 GMT -5
So yall are saying that if a team does not want to resign you and you still want to play that you should just retire instead of finding a new team that does want you? Don't be stupid. I would love to see Montana's Chiefs jersey, Rice's Raiders jersey, Smith's Cardinal jersey, Moon's Viking/Seahawk/Chief jersey, Peyton in a Heat jersey, Malone in a Lakers jersey, Boggs in a Devil Rays jersey...... all hanging up in their respective HOFs.
That said, if you want to keep playing you should be able to keep playing. It shouldn't be up to your team to decide that they are ready for you to retire. Thats dumb.
Also, I'm pretty sure in baseball you are able to pick which team you go to the HOF in. ie. Nolan. Not sure about the other sports. The reason Emmitt did it was so he could say he ended his career in Dallas. Its not the player, but the teams, that want the one day contract because their colors are the ones that will be on display in the HOF.
In conclusion, players can work whereever they want, especially if their current employer is not going to renew their contract.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ticket Mouse on Feb 11, 2009 16:14:25 GMT -5
Cooperstown started dictating which team you go in with a few years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by P. Marf on Feb 11, 2009 17:28:16 GMT -5
Well thats the least of my points.
|
|
fischer
honorary peso (chingador*)
Posts: 16,271
|
Post by fischer on Feb 11, 2009 19:15:23 GMT -5
Sully, you lost your argument right there... NO ONE remembers or talks about Emmitt with the Cards. No one talks about Montana with the Chiefs. They didn't tarnish their legacy. Those last years are quickly forgotten and people remember the great times only.
Right now there is a bad taste in everyone's mouth because it is so recent. Give it a couple of years, no one will be talking about it.
I am still trying to figure out why anyone cares about the one day contract. What difference does it make? It hurts no one.
|
|
|
|
Post by P. Marf on Feb 11, 2009 20:03:43 GMT -5
Denton Broncos 1 Spares 0
|
|
|
|
Post by The River Assassin on Feb 12, 2009 11:11:03 GMT -5
That said, if you want to keep playing you should be able to keep playing. It shouldn't be up to your team to decide that they are ready for you to retire. Thats dumb. In conclusion, players can work whereever they want, especially if their current employer is not going to renew their contract. Yes, it is dumb, but that is not at all what happened here. He retired, the Packers moved on, then he decided he wanted to come back. The Packers were going to resign him until he retired. Its not the player, but the teams, that want the one day contract because their colors are the ones that will be on display in the HOF. No shit, that doesn't make it any less gay. |
|
fischer
honorary peso (chingador*)
Posts: 16,271
|
Post by fischer on Feb 12, 2009 11:12:30 GMT -5
what exactly makes it gay? You have yet to give a real reason. Like I said earlier, everyone wins.
|
|
cowtownmike
honorary peso (chingador*)
I done been thru the scruggles.
Posts: 12,467
|
Post by cowtownmike on Feb 12, 2009 11:17:38 GMT -5
What's the big deal? Let him sign a one day with the Pack and retire with the team he lead for so many years. I got no problem with the one day.
|
|
|
|
Post by The River Assassin on Feb 12, 2009 11:18:37 GMT -5
Sully, you lost your argument right there... NO ONE in Dallas remembers or talks about Emmitt with the Cards. No one talks about Montana with the Chiefs. They didn't tarnish their legacy. Those last years are quickly forgotten and people remember the great times only. Right now there is a bad taste in everyone's mouth because it is so recent. Give it a couple of years, no one will be talking about it. I am still trying to figure out why anyone cares about the one day contract. What difference does it make? It hurts no one. FIFY. Sure fans of the teams where they were great don't remember, but there are plenty of people outside the fan base that remember Montana struggling to get off the ground in KC and Emmitt blowing up his shoulders in Phoenix. Just because you don't remember them that way doesn't mean everyone else does. I don't really care about the one day contract, I just think it is one of the gayest things in sports. If you want to keep playing, and a team is willing to sign you, go for it. Just understand that you may not get to go in to the HOF with the team that you would like. |
|
fischer
honorary peso (chingador*)
Posts: 16,271
|
Post by fischer on Feb 12, 2009 11:22:47 GMT -5
What would be the point of that? You still have given no reason as to why its gay.
Also, I have not heard anyone on any radio or tv station, in Sports Illustrated or in any newspaper mention Emmitt's cardinal year, or Montana's chiefs years. They don't talk about it. Its not just me. I have no ties with San Francisco so your argument is gone on that as well.
Now, you may think of the cards and chiefs, but no one else does.
|
|
|
|
Post by The River Assassin on Feb 12, 2009 11:25:18 GMT -5
what exactly makes it gay? You have yet to give a real reason. Like I said earlier, everyone wins. It's gay because it's not a real contract. They do a press conference sometime in the summer and that is it. If the player wants to go in with that team he should at least have to play a few minutes with the team during the season. All that said, why is it the team you played for last. Would make a lot more sense to me to do the team you played for the longest, which would eliminate the problem altogether. |
|
