Beast, don't you think that an overpaid player causes dissention. We as fans might think it isn't a big deal, but I bet in that locker room, there's a problem. It's basic human nature.
"DakotaT" wrote:
It depends.... do you have professions or money grabbing whores?
now I think every teams has some of both but I think the Packers have more professions than most teams. But are you gonna keep the best players? Or the ones making money when you don't have a money problem. I'd take the better player...
plus Poppinga has been a veteran leader... just ask Hawk. Not only that but do we know if his contract is based on incentive or not? I know Chillar contract is based on incentives which is something reporters don't watch... they just talk about the max amount possible.
What reason is there to cut Poppinga other than he's making more than you would like? If you cut someone just for the money your making a statement to the players get your money not because you maybe cut if your making too much... that's a bad message.
So in other words it's a bad massage ether way. So it comes down which is worse? I think saying you'll be cut if you make too much even though your one of the better players is a worse massage. PLUS... cutting a player that can help the team is stupid unless they have problems which Poppinga has no problems off the field.