posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 06:39 PM
This is a concept that boggles my mind. The NFL is a bit of a rarity in the fact that they can end contracts whenever they choose. It promotes a
self-centered approach to the game where players play for the name on the back, not the one on the front. But in a game where injuries are so
prevalent and careers are short, one would be tough to fault someone for trying to provide for their family within the short career they may be
offered. Terrell Owens
But it is the market value of players that changes so drastically that blows my mind.
Three big named players to be moved this off-season.
The Cowboys decided they would rather do without Owens this season. They didn't want to trade him and get anything in return, no they chose to just
release him. The same with the Giants. Two of the elite receivers in the game, released from their respected teams without so much as receiving a
draft pick in return. Now the Broncos traded Cutler and received a quarterback, 2 first round draft picks and a 3rd round draft pick.
If you were to list those three names and say you would have any one of them, a lot of teams would be choosing either Burress or Owens. Yet
their teams received no compensation for them and the Broncos got Kyle Orton, 2 first round draft picks and a 3rd round draft pick.
What is the line of thought behind the releasing of Owens & Burress, rather than trading? Granted the salary and egos are cut from the dressing room,
but get something in return.