clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Should Barrett Ruud hold out?

Let's get the reporting out of the way first.  It's been reported that Ruud will be in training camp and will be a full participant.  That's the good news for the team.  The bad news for the team is that he has one year left on his contract (2009).  With a new CBA being hammered out, he may or may not be an unrestricted free agent next year.  Ruud has stated he wants to remain a Buccaneer, but will it happen?

One of the "methods" players and agents have used to obtain a new contract is to hold out of training camp.  Basically this say, "I'm not working for you and risking injury until you give me long term stability."  Holding out costs a player $17,000 a day, so it does come at an expense.  Holding out is the only leverage (and it's not much) that the player has. Ultimately, it's a showdown between player and owner.  Ruud is showing good faith in management by continuing to show up to work and punch the clock in hopes that they repay him with a deal at his current market value.

So are hold outs acceptable to you as a fan?  These are men that are getting paid a king's ransom to play a child's game.  In Ruud's case, I am completely comfortable giving him an extension, assuming he figures into Bates' scheme as he did Monte's.  But he did sign the contract upon entering the league, so by that token, the team has fulfilled it's part of the agreement.

It's a tightrope between giving into players, thus telling them its acceptable to hold out, but at the same time, the team wants to keep its high profile, productive players. 

While it seems the Tampa Bay Buccaneer fan base is all for giving Barrett Ruud a new contract, what's your take on hold outs in general?  Should teams ignore them or cave?  Drop your thoughts in the comments section