Giants Cut Arrington, Emmons, Petigout, and Morton

[firstdown]

Can we all just agree that after this tread dies that we do not start anymore Lavar threads? Its the same stuff over, and over , and over.........

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

Sure about that? I know you're a capologist & I always appreciate your #s Schneed, but I remember when he signed everyone in NY was saying that the contract wasn't much of a risk for the team, similar to TO's deal, which amounted to a series of 1 yr. deals.

A $5M SB doesn't present much of a risk.

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

first off, all players are going to stand by their agents, especially ones you have had your whole career. He acknoledged the over sight by his agent, he said he wasnt worried about the contract, he said he was all ready a rich man, that playing in DC was the most important thing, more than the 6 million. Danny and LaVar were very close, until this whole contract thing, which the NFLPA forced the arbitration thing. Lavar wanted it dropped. they wouldn't let it drop.

Players fire agents regularly. It doesn't happen often, but it happens w/several players every year.
Standing by your agent against Snyder is one thing, if you really believe them. But going up against the nflpa when they have basically presented all the evidence & said guility is another. Lavar seemed to have something for putting up an ideological stand, like when he refused to let the nfl sell his jersey, even though he stood to make $ from it.
I'm all for standing up for what you believe, but in business you have to be smart about picking your battles. Lavar hasn't been unfortunately.
Of course the nflpa got involved, they don't want agents signing contracts & then turning around and saying "wait, you left out $6mil! I know I signed the contract, but we want the $6mil anyway!"
I always loved Lavar & would like to think he was in the right in the dispute, but in all I don't think he handled it any better than the Skins, who he accused of slighting him. It's a pretty big deal to say publicly that your employer cheated you & side w/your agent that actually signed the deal. My advice to anyone w/a job is to not do that!

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

A $5M SB doesn't present much of a risk.

Exactly, and a hit of $3.6M isn't really that bad.

[HermosaBeach Skin Fan]

I heard it was Tom Cruise playing SS.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

first off, all players are going to stand by their agents, especially ones you have had your whole career. He acknoledged the over sight by his agent, he said he wasnt worried about the contract, he said he was all ready a rich man, that playing in DC was the most important thing, more than the 6 million. Danny and LaVar were very close, until this whole contract thing, which the NFLPA forced the arbitration thing. Lavar wanted it dropped. they wouldn't let it drop.

I don't think that the NFLPA forced it to go into arbitration. I think that Lavar,his agent and the Redskins decided to let it go into arbitration to get the matter settled. The NFLPa represents the players and if Lavar said to drop the issue it would not make much sense for the NFLPA to presue an issue that the player was not willing to fight.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Exactly, and a hit of $3.6M isn't really that bad.

I think 31 teams around the league would be wary of a $3.6 million cap hit.

This is the life we chose.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I think 31 teams around the league would be wary of a $3.6 million cap hit.

I think it entirely depends on which player's contract you are talking about. In my mind, a $3.6M cap hit due to a bad gamble on player with a lot of upside isn't that much. He didn't work out, but I think a lot of people thought that Arrington had the potential to be a major force. Arrington didn't work out and the Giants lost their bet, but $3.6M isn't a lot relative to his potential.

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I don't think that the NFLPA forced it to go into arbitration. I think that Lavar,his agent and the Redskins decided to let it go into arbitration to get the matter settled. The NFLPa represents the players and if Lavar said to drop the issue it would not make much sense for the NFLPA to presue an issue that the player was not willing to fight.

I dont know if I can find the article but LaVar did want it dropped. the players association wanted it to go to arbitration because of what happened with the contract. Arrington worked something out with the team, the players association wanted to nail the agent, which they did.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I think it entirely depends on which player's contract you are talking about. In my mind, a $3.6M cap hit due to a bad gamble on player with a lot of upside isn't that much. He didn't work out, but I think a lot of people thought that Arrington had the potential to be a major force. Arrington didn't work out and the Giants lost their bet, but $3.6M isn't a lot relative to his potential.

Exactly.

He was a gamble for them but he also didn't break their bank either.

[That Guy]

Lavar does NOT want to come back, so this poll is moot. not happening. next.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by That Guy

Lavar does NOT want to come back, so this poll is moot. not happening. next.

Now Ramsey on the other hand......

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

The Giants just reportedly axed Chad Morton as well.

[That Guy]

i thought chad played well for them. guess it's all part of the new GM putting his stamp on things.

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by That Guy

i thought chad played well for them. guess it's all part of the new GM putting his stamp on things.

morton had 2 fumbles, i think in week 11, that got him replaced.