- Jul 4, 2014
- 7,872
- 8,215
If this is true, then the owner is putting his GM at a distinct disadvantage with respect to the rest of the league. You don't have to overdo it, but finding some common ground between the SB-heavy contracts that top players have been getting recently and no signing bonus at all is just good business. You certainly shouldn't be squeezing arguably the most important player in the history of your franchise over this.The no signing bonus part is probably from ownership and not Army's call
I'm trying to see this from both sides, and I get it to a degree. But most importantly, I understand the player's view that refusing to accommodate the request for some signing bonus in this deal looks like an attempt to get a player under contract for a certain amount with the hopes that they won't actually have to pay them all of the money. Look, I get the management side, too, protecting the business from having to pay guys not to play. I just don't think this is the deal where you hold to that line in the sand. Petro absolutely should be an exception in my opinion.