Jump to content

It appears this is on Roquan...


madlithuanian
 Share

Recommended Posts

Given some of the high profile off the field issues some players have had,  no way I agree to this as an organization.  If you're concerned about losing your money because of off the field issues,  maybe try being a responsible grownup and not putting yourself into crap situations.  I've gotten into my fair share of trouble,  but it's not that hard to stay out of it. 

To be honest,  this kind of thinking is dangerous to the team. I hope it gets worked out and Smith is a great player for the Bears,  but I'm a Bears fan, not a player fan.  I'd rather let him walk, and get nothing for him, draft someone who can get on-board, than play this stupid game.  I know - crazy.  But the prima Donna athlete B.S. gets old.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jason said:

I fully realize the scenario in place, and the contract language being discussed. At this point, it's clear Roquan Smith, his agent, or both are to blame for the entire situation.

He's quickly losing fans.

The agent is trying to pull the keys from ownership.  It is too bad we have, who I believe is, a great guy and the language would never effect him. This is giving him a black eye if it does not get resolved soon. This article clarifies more of what is going on and is damaging to Smith. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With Trevathan not losing guaranteed money last year I can’t see why Smith can’t see that the Bears will do the right thing such as what they did with Miller (TE) giving him a 1 year contract  

It seems that Smith and his agents are also wanting protection if Smith is disciplined for other non football matters and I would be really disappointed if they concede to this. 

I would rather the Bears maintain their position even if he never signs for the Bears and we lose the player at the cost of the 1st round pick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bill said:

So lets trade him and next years first to the Raiders for Mack.  

Not so sure about next year's first in that deal but the trade concept I like.   Having to pay out one of the biggest contracts, if not the biggest, for a defensive player is a tough pill to swallow.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So from a logistics standpoint, if this never gets worked out.  How does that play out?  Does he take the year off and be part of next years draft leaving us with out our first round pick in this past draft?  Do we get compensation for that?  Feels like if a deal doesn't get done we get screwed.  I agree with the comment about agents wanting to use this contract dispute as precedent protect players from losing money even if they do something stupid that ultimately lets down their team and hurts the team.  In game heat of the moment type things is one thing, off field issues, or even repeated poor behavior on the field is entirely another.  If a player is going to be an ars  there needs to be consequences to that behavior.  It makes me concerned if he's that concerned about being a screw up that it's holding this thing up.    If the Bears have proven anything it's that they try to do right by their players.  They could have taken away Travathon's guarantees, and they didn't need to extend Miller a contract knowing full well he'd not play this year.  The Bears aren't the cheapskates they used to be, and aren't the kind of organization that looks to screw it's players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BearFan2000 said:

So from a logistics standpoint, if this never gets worked out.  How does that play out?  Does he take the year off and be part of next years draft leaving us with out our first round pick in this past draft?  Do we get compensation for that?  Feels like if a deal doesn't get done we get screwed.  I agree with the comment about agents wanting to use this contract dispute as precedent protect players from losing money even if they do something stupid that ultimately lets down their team and hurts the team.  In game heat of the moment type things is one thing, off field issues, or even repeated poor behavior on the field is entirely another.  If a player is going to be an ars  there needs to be consequences to that behavior.  It makes me concerned if he's that concerned about being a screw up that it's holding this thing up.    If the Bears have proven anything it's that they try to do right by their players.  They could have taken away Travathon's guarantees, and they didn't need to extend Miller a contract knowing full well he'd not play this year.  The Bears aren't the cheapskates they used to be, and aren't the kind of organization that looks to screw it's players.

I think we are SOL if he doesn't sign with us.  I think he goes back into next year's draft and we lose the pick.  Maybe someone else here knows the exacts...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

There is no way it goes that far.  To start, next year's draft is loaded with defenders and Smith is lucky to get drafted in the top 15 costing him millions, let alone a year of lost income.

He'll be in camp soon.

I sure hope so Mongo.  Not sure what kind of spell CAA is putting over Smith in order to further their gains with contracts going forward.  Trumaine was their client too, yet somehow Smith drew shortest straw to be made example of to move their agenda forward on our dime.  F CAA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

seems like the next CBA needs to address this.  The slotting was a good start to reign in outlandish deals for players who've yet to play a down, now the agent are squabbling over things like this.  It's a rookie contract, these kids need to be in camp on time.  Haggling over things like this doesn't serve their clients or their clients team well.  It's a power struggle and they are using clients to gain future business trying to look like "we're fighting for you."  Do we have to get to a point where rookie contracts and their language is standardized?  It's a way different thing than a players second or third contract.  Time missed as a rookie is far more valuable to the player and respective team.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roquan is not the only CAA represented player, and all the others have signed. So it is hard to point the finger at them now if all their other clients have signed. Ultimately it is between the team and the player. Right now both sides are failing IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/3/2018 at 2:07 PM, madlithuanian said:

It's a pissing contest and us fans are getting the splash hitting us...

true.

mostly this is an advertisement for CAA to show they fight for players even when contracts are slotted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought getting a stud player with good character and a hard worker would be no problem being into camp. I think the CAA put the on field hits into the contract and the Bears caved in to get him in to camp. Then CAA added other parameters into it because they saw a pushover in negotiations and this is where we are at. Smith has say so but not like he has ever did this before and is in a catch 22 situation. I see him being in camp within a week, pushing this to the limit doesn't bold well for either side. The extra practice time because of the HOF game puts this is more public place but one week will still be plenty of time to get acclimated to the NFL and start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...