Anquan Boldin vs. Arizona Cardinals Update

by cgolden on Aug 20, 2008 3:25 PM MDT in General Arizona Cardinals News

Since it looks like this could be an ongoing issue for a while, we'll try and give you the blow by blow. There isn't any breaking news out there but both sides have addressed the media and as you might expect, trade rumors are popping up everywhere.

One day later, Boldin hasn't backed down a bit and he responds to questions about his image and the possibility of being traded:

Boldin was asked if he worried that his image was suffering because of his trade request and other comments. "I'm not worried about that. Anybody who knows me knows what kind of guy I am. They know that I'm a hard worker. I'm a guy that does the right thing on and off the field. I'm not worried about my reputation being tarnished for me telling the truth." And, finally, his comments about asking for the trade: "My whole thing was if I'm not going to be treated fairly and my hard work and loyalty are not going to be rewarded then let me go somewhere where it will be rewarded. That's how I feel and I'll continue to feel that way."

Coach Whisenhunt isn't being as vocal though, he made it clear today that he will not be addressing the situation for the time being. The Cardinals are sticking to their guns though and are saying that they have no intentions of trading him and still hope to sign him to a new deal.

On the Trade Front: If the Cardinals pull of the unlikely and decide to trade Boldin before the season starts, there seem to be numerous suitors. First let me state that these are all rumors right now but some reports have as many as 17 teams offering first round picks for his services. Other reports put his value as high as a 1st and a 2nd round pick. The only player trade that I keep hearing continuously is with the Eagles and involves cornerback Lito Sheppard. If you ask me Sheppard is very similar to Boldin in many ways including age (27), success (two time Pro Bowler), injury risk (missed 15 games the past 4 years) and agent (Drew Rosenhaus), so I'm not terribly interested in that idea. The smart thing, at least in my opinion, is just to ride this thing out and hope that a winning season quiets his complaints. After the season they'll have to decide whether or not to pay him big bucks or just get what they can get for Boldin. What's your take on it????

Tweet Comment 17 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

After mulling the whole thing over,

I have kind of changed my mind on the situation from what I first thought. The Cards need to do to Q what the Bengals did to “Ocho-Cinco” and not budge. He will have no choice but to play and play hard as well because if he doesn’t, he’ll be worth nothing when trade talks or free agency come. If he wants to sit, let him sit. It would hurt him worse than hurting us.

by boogatt66 on Aug 20, 2008 3:46 PM MDT reply actions

very true

I can’t see him going as far as TO but I wouldn’t mind hearing the Cardinals say, you’re either playing for us or your not playing at all. He knows what his options are and he konws how little leverage he actually has.

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Aug 20, 2008 5:56 PM MDT up reply actions

Hate to see him go...

but if we traded him during or before this season, I would only be satisfied with a stud Olineman.

by AJ BirdWatcher on Aug 20, 2008 4:46 PM MDT reply actions

This OL would look better with a top 5 LT or G

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Aug 20, 2008 5:57 PM MDT up reply actions

love Q

As much as I talk about getting rid of Q, I must explain myself. I’ve followed Q since his rookie year when I was in Iraq. I have always been a fan. I also love the Cards and have been a fan since ’01. I have to side with the team in that no one player is bigger than the team. I do believe there were promises made that were not kept, but any issues should have remained in house. If no agreement was reached he could just sit out the entire season with an “injury” like a lot of others do. Then get traded in the offseason and noone would be the wiser. He is known to be injury prone. Whatever happens, I will wish Q the best because he has earned it.

by hevchv on Aug 20, 2008 6:56 PM MDT reply actions

Q

His injury status does cloud this issue. When he’s healthy he’s one of the better WRs in the league but if he can only get on the field for 12 or 13 games then his value drops significantly.

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Aug 22, 2008 5:55 AM MDT up reply actions

The ultimate answer really is...

Guaranteed Contracts. A lot of people think that football players are greedier than their counterparts in other sports. I don’t think that is the case necessarily, but they are really just looking out for themselves. People talk about “honoring the contract” when a player is holding out, but what about when the team just cuts ties with the player? The Marcel Shipp situation is a perfect example. Why didn’t the Cards honor the contract they gave Marcel?

All the real money they get comes with their signing bonus, and then because the team can cut them at any time, the rest is sort of nebulous. If contracts were guaranteed, then players wouldn’t hold out because they’d be getting paid no matter what. Their security would give the teams security.

I think this requires teams to be more responsible with their contract negotiations, and you don’t get garbage like Clements’ contract with the Niners last year, with huge salaries in the ending years that everyone knows they won’t ever pay, which just makes all the other players unhappy.

That’s my two cents. What do you guys think?

by bcloirao on Aug 21, 2008 12:49 AM MDT reply actions

i agree

100%. But until guarenteed contracts are part of the NFL, then they need to play for what they agree to or switch sports. A lot of these athletes were two and three letterman athletes who had a chance to make it in other sports as well. Like any other job, the employer makes the rules. If you can’t play by their rules, you will be fired and someone else will get payed much less to do your job. Its a take it or leave it type deal. Guarentee the contracts and this discussion is over. These guys new the risks when they joined the NFL.

by hevchv on Aug 21, 2008 1:32 AM MDT up reply actions

I'm with you

I agree with your arguments—the players need to play by the rules established in their sport, true.

But especially with that being the case, the teams should NEVER have renegotiated anyone’s contract for having “outplayed it”. They set a paradigm where players have the expectation of having their contracts torn up as soon as they have a decent season, or as soon as some other team around the league gives a marginal player an outrageously huge contract.

I recognize that my argument is too high level to be useful specifically in the Anquan situation, but if you don’t think this is going to come back to bite the Cards again very soon (A-Dub, Dockett, Hightower maybe?) you’re crazy.

by bcloirao on Aug 21, 2008 10:56 AM MDT up reply actions

contracts

That’s definitely what Q is thinking about. He knows that he’s always one play away from never receiving an NFL paycheck again. The only number that truly matters to a player is the guaranteed amount.

Ultimately though, you can’t feel too bad for the players b/c they agreed to this system.

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Aug 21, 2008 5:26 AM MDT up reply actions