Westbrook fires agent Fletcher Smith

[Diomedes]

age is irrelevant here because he wants to be paid not just for the future but for services already rendered

the more I think on it, the stupider this is

by this kind of reasoning, if a player had underperformed over the past several years, the team could argue that he owes them money for services not rendered, which is of course ludicrous.  there is no way in hell anyone is going to pay you extra on top of the agreed amount for what you did yesterday, and to expect them to do that is ridiculous

[ice grillin you]

age is relevant to the FO...giving Westbrook a pile of money won't make him 25 again
so are injuries, which don't typically decrease with age
team reputation is not important to them, obviously...they appear to take the attitude that the NFL is the only game in town and if you wanna play you'll take the deal they offer; it's not about winning games it's about making money, and there's plenty of talent around to ensure that without going crazy for an old, oft injured RB

just laying out their side...I don't see them giving Westbrook 30M, even with a holdout

agreed...i know how they think....im pointing out what they should do in this case...the smart business move here is to overpay...if they can meet in the middle and make westbrook happy all the better

Howard was harping on the fact that the Eagles offered him the maximum they could possibly offer allowed by the CBA.  Obviously that's coming from Banner, but I almost believe it.

if this is true then the media reports of 30 mil are just plain wrong...i just find it hard to belive that westbrook could be told that the most he can "legally" get is X and he still wants more than that...doesnt make sense

[ice grillin you]

age is irrelevant here because he wants to be paid not just for the future but for services already rendered

the more I think on it, the stupider this is

by this kind of reasoning, if a player had underperformed over the past several years, the team could argue that he owes them money for services not rendered, which is of course ludicrous.  there is no way in hell anyone is going to pay you extra on top of the agreed amount for what you did yesterday, and to expect them to do that is ridiculous

if a player under performs in the nfl he gets cut and gets no more money

and you couldnt be more wrong about teams paying for past performance...30+ year olds often get contracts that would belie their declining value due to age...but often they get that money because they outperformed their previous contract

[rjs246]

if this is true then the media reports of 30 mil are just plain wrong...i just find it hard to belive that westbrook could be told that the most he can "legally" get is X and he still wants more than that...doesnt make sense

My 'Athletes are dumber than a bag of mud' theory explains that situation nicely.

[Rome]

If you guys don't stop arguing about this, I'm going to post this photo every hour on the hour until you do.

[rjs246]

I wasn't even aware that anyone was arguing about anything, but the more fat dudes in flipflops you can post the better.

[Diomedes]

the smart business move here is to overpay...

well, that depends on the definition of business. if the goal is to make money rather than win games, then overpaying is the furthest thing from smart

you're effectively talking about creating good will by overpaying, which could only possibly result in positive returns if failure to create good will would drive away fans or other players.

this being the NFL, neither of those consequences are in play.  fans might bitch but they'll still spend, and players might not like the Eagles as much as the Cowboys, but they don't have anywhere else to play and at the end of the day, the money is still a damn sight better than letting some other player take it

simply put, unless the Eagles want to win games before all else, overpaying is a bad business decision

[Rome]

For the last time I will not post photos of myself on this board.

Stalker.

[ice grillin you]

if this is true then the media reports of 30 mil are just plain wrong...i just find it hard to belive that westbrook could be told that the most he can "legally" get is X and he still wants more than that...doesnt make sense

My 'Athletes are dumber than a bag of mud' theory explains that situation nicely.

people are dumb and you would be one of those if you believe this is happening...if you think westbrook is asking for to much thats one thing...if you think hes asking for more than he is allowed by the cba then ignorance rules your world...unless he hasnt been told this by any of his lawyers or agents...i suppose thats possible but highly unlikely


id be interested in seeing this clause or rule that caps the amount of money a player can make in a re do on his deal

[ice grillin you]

the smart business move here is to overpay...

well, that depends on the definition of business. if the goal is to make money rather than win games, then overpaying is the furthest thing from smart

you're effectively talking about creating good will by overpaying, which could only possibly result in positive returns if failure to create good will would drive away fans or other players.

this being the NFL, neither of those consequences are in play.  fans might bitch but they'll still spend, and players might not like the Eagles as much as the Cowboys, but they don't have anywhere else to play and at the end of the day, the money is still a damn sight better than letting some other player take it

simply put, unless the Eagles want to win games before all else, overpaying is a bad business decision

winning games = more money = smart business

one home playoff game would pay a good amount of westbrooks signing bonus

[rjs246]

if this is true then the media reports of 30 mil are just plain wrong...i just find it hard to belive that westbrook could be told that the most he can "legally" get is X and he still wants more than that...doesnt make sense

My 'Athletes are dumber than a bag of mud' theory explains that situation nicely.

people are dumb and you would be one of those if you believe this is happening...if you think westbrook is asking for to much thats one thing...if you think hes asking for more than he is allowed by the cba then ignorance rules your world...unless he hasnt been told this by any of his lawyers or agents...i suppose thats possible but highly unlikely


id be interested in seeing this clause or rule that caps the amount of money a player can make in a re do on his deal

Way to take my snarky sarcastic comment seriously.

[Diomedes]

I don't think the Eagles are willing to wager an extra five or ten million like that, it's just not the way they do business.

[reese125]

arguably one of/if not the best versatile running backs in the NFL should and can ask for whatever he wants. Thats why he switched agents because the other one he had was a Hoyda.

He knows he wont get that--but negotiations have to start somewhere--why not at its $30 million max unrealistic in the Eagles or fans eyes or not?

[ice grillin you]

farg versatile
hes a top 10 ten nfl player period
and the most important player to his team in the league
by a lot


now that mcnabb is a shell of his former self...look at the eagles offense without westbrook...its frighteningly bad

[Rome]

People switch agents all the time because they're unrealistic.  It happens every day in real estate.

I have a property that's worth $100,000.  I want to sell it for $150,000 because that's what I want.  Any decent agent will give me the facts and say there's no way I can get $150,000 so I'm not going to waste my time trying.

Fletcher Smith seems like that kind of agent, and honestly, I think that's why Westbrook hasn't found anyone to replace him yet because any reputable agent will tell him that $30M is a pipe dream (just as I suspect Smith did).

Whatever, though.  Someone please stab me for participating in this circle jerk.