View Single Post
Old
02-16-2006, 04:32 PM
  #85
pelts35.com
Registered User
 
pelts35.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 11,612
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rover
Why do so many people think forsberg owes the flyers anything? His situation is different cause he was a free agent. Forsberg could have chosen to sign with any team. He chose the flyers and therefore the flyers owe him for choosing them, not the other way around. Who cares if the flyers are paying him 5 mill. Forsberg could have gotten 5 mill from any team, so he owes them nothing really. You also can't compare contractual obligations of athletes to the real world, so it's pointless to make any comparisons. I'm not even a forsberg fan, but recognize that the flyers owe him a lot more than he owes them. The only thing i agree on is that forsberg should bear the risk and if he gets injured playing in the tournament, then he shouldn't collect his pay while he's out for the flyers.
People think that Forsberg owes the Flyers anything because he signed a contract with them. A contract is a two-way street. The one party agrees to pay x dollars in exchange for the other party to fulfill his contractual obligations. In this particular case, the Flyers are contractuallly obligated to pay Peter Forsberg $5 million. Peter Forsberg is then contractually obligated to play hockey for the Philadelphia Flyers.


What more do the Flyers owe Forsberg for signing with them other than his salary? Should they build him a statue or perhaps issue a commemorative coin?

What does the fact that he could have gotten that contract from any other team have to do with anything? Does that lessen Forsberg's responsibility to play for the Flyers?

So basically, what you are saying, is that any superstar free agent doesn't owe anything to the team he signs because he could have signed anywhere?

pelts35.com is offline