Carson Palmer

[Vegas]

As you probably know, with 4 years and $46 million left on his contract, the Bengals QB Carson Palmer still says he would rather retire than play for the Bengals and wants a trade to another team.

Bengals owner Mike Brown is refusing to grant Palmer his request even though he could at least get some value in return for his franchise compared to the nothing the team gains in this current situation.

So I think the Bengals should trade Palmer (preferably to my Seahawks. .)

Do you think the Bengals should trade Palmer?

[chewey]

Mike Brown is an idiot and the Bengals will never have sustained success until he dies, his daughter takes over, and she actually hires a general manager. Mike Brown as owner is the de facto GM but doesn't know a lick about football. This has been the big problem with the Bengals since Paul Brown died and his idiot son took over.

[Sickman]

pretty much what chewey said.

[TTX]

Brown is a complete idiot that is for sure.

[swarm]

I see both sides of this.

Giving into Palmer is like giving into a greedy union. He signed a contract. It's him who's not living up to it, not the Bengals. If the owner gives in to Palmer's demands, it opens the door for all other disgruntled players to do the same or similar. Then you have a mutiny on your hands.

On the flip side, it's a unique position to be in. Most players never threaten to retire if you don't trade them. This is far different than a simple "hold out". Players who want to keep playing, who need the money, eventually come back (see Vincent Jackson and Logan Mankins). Threatening to leave the game is a whole other story. If Palmer really does retire, can't he just un-retire and join a new team anyways? This is what Favre did with the Vikes, right? So the smart thing is to then get whatever you can for the guy. Speaking of Favre, how is this really different than when Favre held the Pack (then the Vikes) hostage with his on again off again retirement plans? I don't think it's much different at all.

It comes down to pride and I won't be surprised if the Bengals do not trade him, and let him retire. The Bengals might not be the best run franchise in sports, but they drafted Palmer no.1 overall, and made him a very rich man. They've surrounded him with plenty of talent over the years too. Imo, he has nothing to complain about. In fact, I think he needs to show a little more loyalty to the Bengals. He signed a contract. Play it out. If after that you don't want to be a Bengal, you aren't legally obligated to. You're a free agent and can play for whoever you want then. Simple as that.

[vx]

I don't think it's a simple case of retire from one team, unretire and get to play for another. In Favre's case, for example, his biggest beef with the Packers was that, after he retired, they wouldn't give him a release. Meaning, if he unretired, the only team he was allowed to return to was the Packers. The Jets, on the other hand, gave him that release, that's why he was able to unretire and sign with the Vikings the second time.
So, if Palmer retires and the Bengals retain ownership of his rights, then, I do believe, the only team he could unretire to would be the Bengals.
I knew when Favre was pulling his crap that he was setting a bad precedent. We will be seeing more and more of players "retiring" in order to try to manipulate their way onto a team they want to play for.
Hopefully, the Bengals will let Palmer retire and hold onto his rights. Otherwise, we will be seeing this same scenario play out year after year with some self-entitled crybaby trying to manipulate the system.

[Vegas]

Aug 18, 2011 6:50:28 GMT -5 vx said:

I don't think it's a simple case of retire from one team, unretire and get to play for another. In Favre's case, for example, his biggest beef with the Packers was that, after he retired, they wouldn't give him a release. Meaning, if he unretired, the only team he was allowed to return to was the Packers. The Jets, on the other hand, gave him that release, that's why he was able to unretire and sign with the Vikings the second time.
So, if Palmer retires and the Bengals retain ownership of his rights, then, I do believe, the only team he could unretire to would be the Bengals.

From what I understand, vx you are correct.

Palmer has 4 years left on his contrac,t but his contract does not expire necessarily in 2015. Palmer's contract instead expires after he plays four more years for the Bengals. ESPN even went on to say yesterday that if Palmer stays retired for the next 30 some years and then suddenly unretires at the age of 65 he still owes the Bengals 4 more years.