Originally posted by Antonio's Gates
View Post
Rivers restructures
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Den60 View PostIt is rare. Didn't say I would do it myself. I just don't see a reason to say that Rivers is being a team player because he agreed to getting $5M in a lump sum now rather than over 3-4 months.
And I am my employer. I see no reason to give money back because since I bought this business I have outsold the best year the previous ownership ever did by a significant amount each year since I took over. This year will be our best even with a down domestic market though I have to thank Google for a late resurgence here in the states. Much of my income is tied to the success of the company. If the company doesn't make as much neither do I.Go Rivers!
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
-
-
Originally posted by QSmokey View PostRare? As in never? Preposterous statement. Bad season(s) = player gives back money to prove he's a team player. LOL! Can't believe I missed the press release on the "rare" occasions that has happened.
I believe there have been players that have given back money in order to allow the team to go out and get someone(s) to make the team better I just can't remember whom. But the real point is being lost here; that Rivers didn't give anything up at all so there really is no reason to thank him for being a "team player."
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Beerman View PostYea, I'm with Den here. Players don't give back money willingly. They'll restructure all the time, but I can't recall when a player cut salary out of the goodness of their hearts.
And the "team player" is that the team was up against the cap. He couldve easily asked that an extension be involved in any restructure.Hashtag thepowderblues
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
-
That's not the point at all, it's your point Den, which many dont agree with. He restructured getting nothing more out of it, how many players do that? It wasn't like he wasn't going to make this money this year, team had no leverage. Most players would exploit that, ask for more guaranteed, etc. Rivers didn't, just simply did it to help the team. He gave up leverage, that's giving up something regardless of your acceptance of that fact.
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by oneinchpunch View PostThat would make you against Den, here.
And the "team player" is that the team was up against the cap. He couldve easily asked that an extension be involved in any restructure.
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by oneinchpunch View PostAnd the "team player" is that the team was up against the cap. He couldve easily asked that an extension be involved in any restructure.
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by sandiego17 View PostThat's not the point at all, it's your point Den, which many dont agree with. He restructured getting nothing more out of it, how many players do that? It wasn't like he wasn't going to make this money this year, team had no leverage. Most players would exploit that, ask for more guaranteed, etc. Rivers didn't, just simply did it to help the team. He gave up leverage, that's giving up something regardless of your acceptance of that fact.
- Top
- Bottom
Comment
-
Comment