|
Post by Thunder Good-Oil on May 6, 2015 13:16:35 GMT -5
If he gets one of about 10 spots on the practice squad he'll earn about $6,500/week for up to 17 weeks,
|
|
|
Post by gramps on May 6, 2015 13:22:06 GMT -5
If he gets one of about 10 spots on the practice squad he'll earn about $6,500/week for up to 17 weeks, Yes, I have agreed with that on more than one occasion. So, what is your point? You are the one who said that he would make more money going to mini-camp than he would in other jobs. I simply pointed out - and with a link that backed what I was saying - that, no, he doesn't have a contract at this point and his only pay is the stipend for the week that he is going to be in mini-camp. Again, if you will think about it for a minute you are arguing with yourself on this one. What I posted is accurate.
|
|
|
Post by Thunder Good-Oil on May 6, 2015 13:28:53 GMT -5
If he gets one of about 10 spots on the practice squad he'll earn about $6,500/week for up to 17 weeks.
|
|
|
Post by Thunder Good-Oil on May 6, 2015 13:54:48 GMT -5
He'll make as much in that month as he would in three years as a manager trainee working the counter at Enterprise Rent A Car. Maybe, maybe not. This is from 2013, but the numbers probably haven't changed much: www.baltimorebeatdown.com/2013/7/23/4550368/training-camp-compensationRookies were paid a $925 stipend during training camp during that year. Since he is not signing a contract, that's it. He doesn't get paid to be there, just the stipend. The $925 is what rookies under contract were to be paid by Baltimore in 2012 according to the NFLPA's memo. Worley isn't a rookie under contract with the Ravens in 2012. Haslam can pay Worley anything he wants to pay him to be in the Browns' camp.
|
|
|
Post by TNCOWBOY on May 7, 2015 18:24:55 GMT -5
Justin Worley has as much chance of making the Browns or any other team as Riley Ferguson. He possesses not a single NFL skill.
Probably make a fine coach if he chooses.
|
|
|
Post by gramps on May 7, 2015 21:53:44 GMT -5
The $925 is what rookies under contract were to be paid by Baltimore in 2012 according to the NFLPA's memo. Worley isn't a rookie under contract with the Ravens in 2012. Haslam can pay Worley anything he wants to pay him to be in the Browns' camp. So, Jimmy is going to pay an undrafted free agent with no contract coming to mini-camp more than he pays his rookies under contract? Really, Thunder. That's just not realistic.
|
|
|
Post by Thunder Good-Oil on May 7, 2015 22:57:32 GMT -5
Rookies get their regular pay too. They aren't paid less.
|
|
|
Post by TNCOWBOY on May 8, 2015 11:23:40 GMT -5
Thunder in his usual debate pattern where he can't acknowledge basic facts.
|
|
|
Post by gramps on May 8, 2015 14:31:32 GMT -5
The $925 is what rookies under contract were to be paid by Baltimore in 2012 according to the NFLPA's memo. Worley isn't a rookie under contract with the Ravens in 2012. Haslam can pay Worley anything he wants to pay him to be in the Browns' camp. So, Jimmy is going to pay an undrafted free agent with no contract coming to mini-camp more than he pays his rookies under contract? Really, Thunder. That's just not realistic. Uh, Thunder - those "rookies" have a contract. What they are paid is spelled out in their contracts. Until Worley signs a contract he isn't getting paid a dime. He is essentially a walk on. Why is that concept so foreign to you? No contract. No pay. Period.
|
|
|
Post by 404whore on May 8, 2015 14:36:42 GMT -5
Thunder not inspiring much confidence with his command of reality...
|
|
|
Post by Thunder Good-Oil on May 8, 2015 16:30:31 GMT -5
So, Jimmy is going to pay an undrafted free agent with no contract coming to mini-camp more than he pays his rookies under contract? Really, Thunder. That's just not realistic. Uh, Thunder - those "rookies" have a contract. What they are paid is spelled out in their contracts. Until Worley signs a contract he isn't getting paid a dime. He is essentially a walk on. Why is that concept so foreign to you? No contract. No pay. Period. You're citing a 3 year old story for a different team referencing rookie contracts (not "walk ons") and use that to claim you know what Worley's financial arrangement is with the Browns. There is a contract for Worley to be in Browns camp. It could be written or implied, but it's not covered by the NFLPA. Haslam can pay him whatever he wants to. Citing a three year old article with irrelevant facts doesn't give you any insight into Worley's financial arrangement with the Browns. The stipend is just a component of the rookie or any other player's pay package. Unless they aren't contractually obligated to attend the camp, the rookies are making considerably more than the stipend. Sorry, you're wrong again.
|
|
|
Post by Thunder Good-Oil on May 8, 2015 16:34:42 GMT -5
Thunder in his usual debate pattern where he can't acknowledge basic facts. A 2012 article referencing rookie stipends has no relevance to Worley's situation. He isn't under the rookie's contract. Get a copy of his W-2 or 1099 from the Browns and I'll acknowledge a real, and not made up, FACT.
|
|
|
Post by Thunder Good-Oil on May 8, 2015 16:36:14 GMT -5
Worley will win the first ever Browns Super Bowl. FACT ! ! !
|
|
|
Post by gramps on May 10, 2015 10:34:54 GMT -5
Thunder in his usual debate pattern where he can't acknowledge basic facts. A 2012 article referencing rookie stipends has no relevance to Worley's situation. He isn't under the rookie's contract. Get a copy of his W-2 or 1099 from the Browns and I'll acknowledge a real, and not made up, FACT. And you do realize that there is a player's association involved, don't you? It's spelled out in their contracts, which Worley doesn't have. Players who don't have contracts don't get paid. It's not hard to understand that concept.
|
|
|
Post by Thunder Good-Oil on May 10, 2015 10:41:32 GMT -5
A 2012 article referencing rookie stipends has no relevance to Worley's situation. He isn't under the rookie's contract. Get a copy of his W-2 or 1099 from the Browns and I'll acknowledge a real, and not made up, FACT. And you do realize that there is a player's association involved, don't you? It's spelled out in their contracts, which Worley doesn't have. Players who don't have contracts don't get paid. It's not hard to understand that concept. How is there no contract AND the NFLPA is involved? Keep reaching.
|
|