Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by bigreese82, Mar 2, 2006.
The issue wasn't his character.
His character was called into question on post #18.
I mean I wasnt questioning it.
I didn't think you were.
as long as we are on the same page. :ha:
If Carter was willing to play for the vet minimum, I might consider it. But I doubt he'd be willing to do that and the Titans will not throw a lot of money at DT.
At this point, I don't see the Titans even offering Haynesworth a long-term deal.
Restructuring isn't always a good deal for a player, otherwise every player in the league would want to restructure and get the upfront guaranteed money. Lots of players have chosen to get cut than to take a restructured deal.
In most restructured deals, a lot of the money to be paid out is put at the "back end" of the contract and a player is given a small "signing bonus", which would be called guaranteed money and the player plays for the league vet minimum. That's why so many players end up getting cut because the team doesn't want to own up to and pay out that huge back end loaded contract for a player who no longer lives up to that amount of money.
nor should they.
yes that is the difference between guranteed money and non-guranteed money. Guranteed money is actual money that helps TO feed his family nonguranteed money is not actual money and is not useful for feeding TOs family