If you are a free agent in sports, you have two main questions to ask yourself: “Do I want to go play on a team because they offered me a lot of money?” or “Do I want to go play on this team because they are competitive and I think they can win it all?”
Sometimes you get lucky and you get wooed by the Red Sox or Yankees and the choice is made for you. The team that offers you the most money just happened to be a team always in contention to win the World Series (or the championship in any sport).
Other decisions like the ones Curt Schilling recently wrote about on his blog about the school district his kids will enter into as well as Lamar Odom saying he only wants to play in a warm city like Miami probably factors into a free agent's decision. But time and time again we see athletes taking the money as opposed to trying to get a ring. But why? I think the ability to win it all should play a factor, but I guess it really does not. This perplexes me.
How many times do you hear a player say, "It does not matter what you did in the regular season, it is all about the post season"? It is all about the post season, because everyone wants to win it all. How many times did you hear Tom Brady and Randy Moss and Bill Belichick say, it doesn't matter that we are undefeated, we still have not won it all. I'm sure if you ask anybody who plays in a professional sport what their goal is in the sport is they would all say “To win a championship.”
Now I’m not ignorant. I know money is important. I know athletes need to look out for their families and look out for themselves. Plus, an athlete has a limited amount of time to participate in his occupation before age becomes a factor. This is something (most of) the working class does not have to worry about. Everyone wants to be rich and have millions of dollars for doing what they love. It is the American dream. However, at what point in your career do you say, "I have money, now I want a ring"? I feel like at some point athletes need to ask themselves this question.
Most players in major sports become free agents after they've been in the league for five or six years or so. This is most likely the one point in a guy's career where he has the best opportunity to make a ton of money. The first time a player becomes a free agent is the toughest call. They have to weigh the fact that this is their best and maybe only time to garner a big contract versus this is also this is the best time where I will play well enough to help my future team get a ring.
However, if an athlete is lucky enough to become a free agent for a second time and still has multiple teams requesting his services yet still has not been a part of a championship team, he should chose the team that gives him the best opportunity to win and take contract price out of the equation.
The hardest factor though to consider is which team will win a championship or be in contention. What if an athlete goes to play for a team he believes will be a competitor but they never end up even making it to the post season? It is extremely difficult to predict which team will win it all. The 2007 and 2008 Cubs looked poised to at least make it to the World Series and ended up getting bounced in the first round both years due to plain bad luck. As good as the Yankees and Red Sox are, only the Red Sox have it won it twice in like the past decade with teams like the Phillies, Cardinals, and White Sox winning it in other years. Nobody would have ever expected the Giants to win it all in 2007. So choosing a team to win it all is extremely risky and unreliable, but I believe you can and should try to spot the teams that will be competitive.
I'm sure owners and GM’s would not like it if players chose better teams than bad teams offering them more money. I'm sure it would be hard for the Detroit Lions and St. Louis Rams and pre-Drew Brees Saints to get free agents without money. But if you are a player, do you really care?
When Miguel Tejada became a free agent, he chose the money. He played some darn good years but on an Orioles team that didn't finish higher than 4th place in their division. Taking his steroid usage aside, do you think he is happy he put up some great numbers and made money on a lousy team? In fact, because of his steroid scandal, I bet he wished he won a championship to help preserve his legacy.
Sometimes athletes are aware that they don't have a lot of time left and would like a ring. Long time and great Kansas City Chief TE Tony Gonzalez wanted out of his existing contract because he knew the Chiefs were not going anywhere. I'd have to imagine winning it all played a factor into former Padres RHP Jake Peavy's decision to eventually sign with the White Sox. In fact, he was already getting paid no matter what. I think he knows his statistics will take a tumble coming into the AL and into a homer friendly park, but I think he also knows the White Sox give him a better chance to win than the Padres will. Marion Hossa seemed to have this in mind as well. He thought the Red Wings gave him a better chance to get a ring than Pittsburgh did and I'm sure he thinks the Blackhawks give him the best chance to win as well.
It's obvious that some players do care about the ring more than the money and I have no problem if a player does choose money over the ability to win a championship. However, I think when that player's career is said and done, he will regret that he didn't at least try to win a championship. I do not always think that a ring should be a player's main goal when signing a contract, but I would like to see athletes take that into account more instead of them signing a huge contract to play for a team that's last in their division every year.
(click to embiggen)
