- Joined
- Oct 2, 2016
- Messages
- 6,535
- Reaction score
- 12,227
Offline
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
If that's a real tweet from MT, he doesn't sound like he's happy with how the Saints have handled player contracts. Maybe reading too much between the lines, but I'm trying to imagine what would make him say something like that.The tweet was later deleted by MT.
I guess getting paid to do nothing upset him.If that's a real tweet from MT, he doesn't sound like he's happy with how the Saints have handled player contracts.
Yeah, was about to say. If there's anyone that should be THRILLED with how the Saints handle contracts, it should be him.I guess getting paid to do nothing upset him.
Indeed.Yeah, was about to say. If there's anyone that should be THRILLED with how the Saints handle contracts, it should be him.
That's probably what happened. He wants to keep that money because he probably plays healthy next year and taking a restructure would mean he would be giving up a lot to perform for pennies. Injuries and setbacks happen, but if MT is healthy and stays healthy, he deserves the money. It's just unfortunate with his injuries.Indeed.
I guess the only thing I can think of is maybe the Saints approached him about restructuring his contract, idk.
He's made almost 50 million dollars playing 10 games in 3 seasons the least he can do is restructure.That's probably what happened. He wants to keep that money because he probably plays healthy next year and taking a restructure would mean he would be giving up a lot to perform for pennies. Injuries and setbacks happen, but if MT is healthy and stays healthy, he deserves the money. It's just unfortunate with his injuries.
But to whose benefit? Is he obligated to repay the team when he outperformed his rookie contract?He's made almost 50 million dollars playing 10 games in 3 seasons the least he can do is restructure.
But to whose benefit? Is he obligated to repay the team when he outperformed his rookie contract?
I’ll side with the player being paid 10/10 times, before in the end, it’s their bodies that go through a half dozen car crashed a game.
But to whose benefit? Is he obligated to repay the team when he outperformed his rookie contract?
I’ll side with the player being paid 10/10 times, before in the end, it’s their bodies that go through a half dozen car crashed a game.
Sure, but nobody's really worth $50 million for playing a game.