The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Looks like the Nationals are selling the farm to nab Scherzer... initial numbers are 7 yrs $210 million... half deferred... they are going to pay him $15million a year for FOURTEEN YEARS! Not sure id want to tie the books up for that long on a pitcher who I believe has already pitched his best baseball... Nice move by DD walking away from that fiscal nightmare... He obviously learned his lesson with the over-inflated contract he dealt to Verlander...

Yeah even close to worth that kinda cash. Even if it's only $15m/year, it's still 14 years, and he might not even be useful for all of the 7 the contract is for.

As much as I hate the idea of Scherzer not being a Tiger I don't blame Little Ceasers for not wanting to be locked into that big of a contract.

I was getting bored with that Malmute thing anyway.

Players have no loyalty antymore. The greedy players and the overpaying owners deserve eachother. There aren't very many players with "old style" values left any more. The only pro sports that I attend regularly any more are hockey and pro golf. I've lost my attraction to the others. I do attend some baseball games with my son and his friends a couple times a year, but if it weren't for him, those might have disappeared from my calendar as well.

(01-19-2015 06:19 PM)texasbronco1 Wrote:  Players have no loyalty antymore. The greedy players and the overpaying owners deserve eachother. There aren't very many players with "old style" values left any more. The only pro sports that I attend regularly any more are hockey and pro golf. I've lost my attraction to the others. I do attend some baseball games with my son and his friends a couple times a year, but if it weren't for him, those might have disappeared from my calendar as well.

Dude get over yourself. What are you, 80? "Players have no loyalty anymore." Sincerely, 1988.

Oh and there's "loyalty" in the NHL? Rick Nash ring a bell? At least he's pulled his head out of his a55 in his 10th season, considering he took that big offer from the Ranjerks four years ago.

As a Nationals fan, I hate this signing. I've been ragging on Tiger fan for YEARS about Illitch and his belief that throwing money at problems will win the World Series. As we've seen the Tigers have done anything but. Apparently Ted Lerner can't help himself and wants to be the Mike Illitch of the NL. Long term, max contracts to 30 y/o pitchers rarely work out well and I bet we see the same happen with Scherzer and the Nats.

It wasn't pitching that sunk the Nats in the playoffs last year, it was crappy hitting and ill-timed hitting at that. Nats haven't upgraded the lineup nor the bench, plus they just dealt their #3 reliever for Yuneil Escobar. While it's better to have a high spending team than a penny pinching franchise like the Marlins, being a top 5 payroll club doesn't guarantee you anything.

Nats need bats, period. Go Nats.

Dear texasbronco, will you stay with your company in perpetuity out of loyalty? Simple question.

Has nothing to do with loyalty. Has everything to do with getting paid as much as possible while in your prime. If the Nats are willing to pay that ridiculous contract for the next 15 years, so be it.

I hate seeing Max go, but this is a wise decision by DD and the Tigers to let him got.

I have a sneaking suspicion that they are going to slide in and sign Shields for about half of what Max got.

"Loyalty" in MLB died when Curt Flood happened because of the reserve clause

Quote:If the Nats are willing to pay that ridiculous contract for the next 15 years, so be it.

Yah. He basically has a contract until he's 44-45 years old. F'ing nuts. I guess inflation will be so high by then, $15m/yr won't be SO high... but his arm will be way worse -- lol.

(01-21-2015 11:33 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  Yah. He basically has a contract until he's 44-45 years old. F'ing nuts. I guess inflation will be so high by then, $15m/yr won't be SO high... but his arm will be way worse -- lol.

I don't know all the ins and outs of his new contract, but I assume the $50 million signing bonus is part of the $210 million he will receive. If this is the case - and he gets paid over a 14-year period - the remaining $160 million of the contract would average out to about $11-12 million over that time.

That sounds more manageable, but it's still crazy $ and as much as it will hurt them in the short-term, I'm glad the Tigers aren't on the hook for it.

Edit: I read this morning that the Nationals will pay $5 million of the signing bonus this year and $15 million each in three seasons to come. Crazy, indeed...