after that entry i posted ( x yesterday ) about kerry rhodes,
it was really heartbreaking to read.
it seems there maybe another issue why he hasn’t been signed.
well an f-bi sent me an email explaining what may really be going on.
it’s not so much sexuality, but money maybe an issue…
There’s another side to the story. After we posted our item regarding the Deadspin article highlighting Rhodes’ absence from the league, multiple league sources reached out to explain that Rhodes could have been on a team for 2013, but that he wanted too much money.
It started with the Cardinals, who were due to pay Rhodes $5.5 million in 2013. One source claims the Cardinals offered Rhodes a reduced contract before cutting him on March 13. Rhodes, however, wanted more than the Cardinals were willing to pay.
Mike Jurecki of 910-AM in Phoenix reported Friday that Arizona actually offered Rhodes a one-year, $3 million guaranteed deal. Per Jurecki, Rhodes wanted to “roll the dice” in free agency — and only the Bengals were interested.
Another source told PFT that one team other than the Bengals contacted Rhodes in the off season. The team in question viewed Rhodes as a player who deserved to earn a contract in the one-year minimum range, but the team learned that Rhodes wasn’t interested in playing unless his compensation was “significant.”
Yet another source said the Rhodes is “just really OK and doesn’t really like football.”
Other sources have characterized these claims as “he said/she said” contentions, pointing out that, regardless of the events that resulted in the Cardinals cutting Rhodes, there’s been no interest since the early days of free agency. One source explained that, in recent months, there have been and continue to be no opportunities or interest even at the minimum salary level, which for Rhodes would be $840,000.
No matter how the dominoes fell for Rhodes in Arizona, the end result is that Rhodes currently is drawing no interest, and that he apparently didn’t draw much in the first place. If the Cardinals truly deemed him to be worthy of a one-year, $3 million contract in March, why would no one offer him anything in May, June, July, August, or September?
Coincidentally, the rumors regarding Rhodes’ sexuality hit the Internet in April.
Based on the timeline, it’s possible that Rhodes priced himself out of the market in March, and that the market otherwise decided after April to avoid him for reasons other than his contractual expectations. The reality of situations like this is that the employers who are steering around a given employee will never admit that they’re doing so for reasons that aren’t legitimate.
For Rhodes, the reality is that the Cardinals reportedly wanted to give him $3 million guaranteed in April, and that no one wants to give him anything now.
Should Kerry Rhodes just take the L and ( x the pay cut )?
i know for me,
i worked my ass off over the years.
i have gained a ton of skills/experience because of this.
anything less than my desired salary ain’t paying the bills.
i’m not going to act like if i good job didn’t offer me a position,
with a pay cut reasonable for me to survive,
that i wouldn’t take it.
bills still got to be paid and a fox does have to eat.
however way you roll the dice,
kerry is not on a team.
maybe he needs to humble himself if he really wants to play again,
or does he really?
when the going gets tough,
should the broke take anything?
from corporate to california pizza kitchen?
pigskin to “put the fries in a separate bag”?
if we do take bite the bullet and take anything,
what does that say about “fighting what you want?”?
knowing your “worth” and your “value”.
that person who said that obviously never heard the word, “rescission”.
i couldn’t help but wonder…
Should we always desire a paycheck to match our potential?
story source: pro football talk