pakowitz

Bonus coverage
McNair's new deal gives Titans cap relief but leaves his future in question
Updated: Monday March 29, 2004 3:02PM

PALM BEACH, Fla.-- In 20 years covering the NFL, I have seen a lot of weird player contracts, but I do believe the one signed by Tennessee quarterback Steve McNair on March 2 takes the cake.

According to NFL contract databank figures obtained by SI.com, the Titans, in whittling down their massive salary-cap figure before the start of free agency early this month, re-worked and extended the 2003 co-MVP's contract through the 2009 season. In so doing, they agreed to pay McNair the highest bonus ever given to a football player: $50 million. But there are several large asterisks to the deal, asterisks that mean he may never see the big payday -- and that leave me wondering if McNair will play football beyond 2006.

"I know [GM] Floyd Reese and Steve got something done," Tennessee coach Jeff Fisher, here for the start of the NFL's annual owners meetings, told me Sunday night. "But I'm not aware of the specifics of the deal."

Let's examine those specifics.


For the rest of this article, click here:



http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...mqb/index.html




one interesting thing i found in this article,

"I think one of the bonuses the Cowboys got in signing Drew Henson was brain-related. He scored an impressive 42 on his Wonderlic test, which the NFL gives to all prospective players. It's a 50-question intelligence and personality examination, taken against the clock. I was once told that a score of 19 is the average for firefighters, 26 for teachers ... and anything above 40 means that mastering an NFL playbook ought to take about seven minutes"

brooks scored what? 17? not good. not good at all

[Edited on 3/30/2004 by pakowitz]

saintfan

Dan Marino scored a 16...yup...he really really did.
Brett Favre scored a lofty 22...no kidding.
Brian Griese...you all know him from his multiple Super Bowl Victories of course...scored a whopping 39.

Now, I ask again as I have asked in the past: What do those numbers really tell ya? :casstet:

DatWho.

Those numbers mean that if you\'re ANTI-BROOKS, that scoring low on the test means you can\'t play QB in the NFL. If you\'re logical, then, one can only conclude that there have been great QB\'s that have scored very low (Marino) and also there have been QB\'s that scored very high that had great careers.

I think the test is called the wonder-lick test or something like that?? Is this really a test that can be counted on to test one\'s intelligence? I\'m no wonderlick expert, but, I have my doubts as to it\'s effectiveness. I suppose it could be the \"end-all\" to proving someone\'s intelligence, but to me, it\'s just ammo for the ANTI-Brooks folks.

Furthermore, how smart do ya have to be to play QB? Let\'s assume that Brooks is as dumb as some suggest. How did the boy ever make it to the NFL? Also, this nit-wit has done much better than some of his peers that blew the test off the charts.

Well, enough rambling. Let everyone make their minds up about the relevance of the test and the one\'s trying to make their case AGAINST Brooks.

A MIND IS A TERRIBLE THING TO WASTE!!

JimBone

For those of you who are hating on Aaron Brooks, what part of 3600 yards 24 TD\'s and only 8 picks dont you like. I know the fumbles were a problem but dont you think his numbers would have been better if you take away half of the dropped balls last year? I can think of at least half a dozen plays that should have been touchdowns but the wideouts didnt come through. I would take Brooks over pretty much anyone in the league save for Manning, Favre, Vick, McNair and maybe Tom Brady solely because he is a winner. Simple as that.

Aaaaaayyyyyy!!
-The Fonz

iceshack149

Welcome to the forum, brother.

As you may guess, this subject is the dead horse around here but it\'s still nice to know that you understand that the Saints quarterback is not the problem.

JimBone

I got your back iceshack

WhoDat

Yeah, the guy is .500 as a starter, costs us more than 2 Deuce McAllisters and led the league in fumbles. He\'s a real winner, I tell you.




Haven\'t had one of these in a while. Let the games begin.

saintfan

Feelin\' a bit sparky eh Whodat?

Wanna show these Rooks what a REAL debate is all about? :P

JimBone

Who Dat...What I was saying is that i would take Tom Brady over Brooks because BRADY is a winner. Look, i like what Brooks brings to the table and if you are gonna blame the offense\'s struggles on him and him alone than you have lost your marbles. Brooks played plenty good enough to put this team in the playoffs and there is nothing you can say that will change my mind about that.