Phillip Rivers Comments on Lockout

[5Stars]

Thought about hooking myself up with that one.

:laugh2:


How you been Cas?

Hey, ABQ...how much would you charge me to send me an Albuquerque phone book here in Utah?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Hey, ABQ...how much would you charge me to send me an Albuquerque phone book here in Utah?

Hey 5Stars,

Nothing. Send me a PM on what your looking for and I'll try to hook you up.

 

[CCBoy]

You might wanna change the tagline under your name.
Probably not the best time for that type of stuff unless it is real and heartfelt. Not a good jokey joke line.

As to the rest you really do not have a point at all.
The wealth amongst NFL players is shared far more evenly than it is amongst the regular citizenship.

The NFL has a minimum wage that escalates fairly rapidly to the point where a veteran makes a million dollars per season.

Lots of very rich players didn't make a million per year for their first few seasons.

Most of the 10%er compliant is so asinine that is hard to fathom anyone with a brain following it. If you really need me to break that down for you I am willing. But be forewarned that the 10%er argument is a guaranteed loser.

You state that without any ground work to see if what you claim is in fact the real facts of the matter. Just how many players on a team are even above a two million a year status? Come back when you are looking at the five to ten percent on a team actually holding three quarters of a cap to begin with...

As to your insinuation of arrogance on my part, that signature was put there by Hostile himself, at my request, when his mother made a remarkable upturn earlier in the year.

The only thing I would change for THAT act of love, would be the addition of a tear...but that would be by Hostile again. For the record...and your comment was NOT needed as to bad taste or an association by YOURSELF.

 

[CCBoy]

No, it does not. It says never having a Union and playing without a CBA would favor those players. But the Union has always re-certified and in fact has added their Union Leader as Legal counsel for current talks.

De-certifying to prevent or reduce a lock out serves every players best interest as they do not get paid at all during the lock out.

Excepting a deal that reduces the amount of the cap does not benefit 90% of the players.

There's lots of dumb things said but players voted and every team agreed to give the Union to right to de-certify. That is verifiable fact and the salient point.

Each team has a Union rep and these players are generally not the highest paid ones. For the Cowboys it is Jason Witten. Anyone think he is some elitist who hates the little guy?

The problem with these world views is you have to apply it. You can't just use it in an argument then discard it altogether for sake of the next one.

All in all though your premise is correct that the Union protects the rank and file more than the top few percent. Elite performers have always gotten paid and will do so under any system.

Decertification has nothing to do with the point of a union being based upon arbitration, purely and simply. Litigation is a horse of a different origin to the right to negotiation as a body. Then there is the change in your own stance as to allocation of funds and the duty of the Union to protect and equalize base levels of rights and protections. You now, instead of disagreeing with undeniable high percentages of total funds available within the context of a cap system, say that now that is just the facts of better players.

(coughing loudly) Our Union's LMOU says nothing about performance standards at any point in defining roles and responsibilities in protections. NO WHERE....

 

[jterrell]

Decertification has nothing to do with the point of a union being based upon arbitration, purely and simply. Litigation is a horse of a different origin to the right to negotiation as a body. Then there is the change in your own stance as to allocation of funds and the duty of the Union to protect and equalize base levels of rights and protections. You now, instead of disagreeing with undeniable high percentages of total funds available within the context of a cap system, say that now that is just the facts of better players.

(coughing loudly) Our Union's LMOU says nothing about performance standards at any point in defining roles and responsibilities in protections. NO WHERE....

Failing to use English properly doesn't make your weak points any stronger.

Litigation is the ONLY way to prevent a lock out and return pay checks coming in to ALL the players.

When you state 2 million dollars are you talking about per yer? After any bonuses? Or simple base salary which is hardly what they claim on the tax returns?

If a player makes 8 million in signing bonus than a 1 mil base does that count? The money arguments are goofy and arbitrary.

The salary cap has increased by OVER 100 million dollars. That effects EVERY player positively as everyone gets paid more money than they did.

We would not be sitting here in a lockout if 90%/70/50 of the players were being hurt by the CBA. It is completely goofy and just plain dumb to argue that is the case. Not only that but salary changes yearly. Guys who were well under 2 mil per year total compensation get paid quite well when their initial free agency option presents itself. Tom Brady was WELL under 2 million per year at one point. Anyone saying the NFLPA hates him? What about Tony Romo, Miles Austin? Those guys were undrafted free agents.They got 20-25k to come here plus minimum deals. Now they are Rick James.

Point to all the 6th and 7th year guys struggling along and maybe you'd have a point. But that isn't the case. Young guys coming in are generally lower paid guys unless top flight draft picks. That is something the NFL wants to make even more severe. How does that benefit those guys? Does the NFLPA fighting against too much protection for NFL owners not benefit them?

This isn't a tenable argument. It falls apart on every level. Just leave it alone and let it die.

 

[dogberry]

What percentage of the players on the a roster at any time of the year make a real second contract?

How many players could work for two years at $2.5 million a year and retire?

I don't think the NFL would want the outcome. But the labor laws seem to make it a plausible outcome regardless of what Jerry Jones or Peyton Manning might desire.

Why isn't it happening, if the Players Association is representing the majority of the players?

 

[DFWJC]

Safe prediction here:
With all of this free time, expect the Rivers family to have another kid (6th ?) by early next year.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

I would bet that only about 2%, hell, maybe less, of all NFL players really have some clue, not all but some, of what is actually taking place.

I would say roughly 1.8% of the nfl players are aware of the goings on of the labor dispute (32 player reps out of some 1700 players).

Pay isn't an issue

 

[jterrell]

What percentage of the players on the a roster at any time of the year make a real second contract?

How many players could work for two years at $2.5 million a year and retire?

I don't think the NFL would want the outcome. But the labor laws seem to make it a plausible outcome regardless of what Jerry Jones or Peyton Manning might desire.

Why isn't it happening, if the Players Association is representing the majority of the players?

The percentage of players who rate a second contract?
It is quite high if you are talking about players on a 53 man roster to start a season. Even Sam Hurd's of the world get a second contract. You don't have to be a starter.

Now are their plenty of guys who come through practice squads or are late season roster add ons? Yup.

The NFLPA is staffed by voting. Each team has a representative who is voted in and then they vote in other things and get team a vote to represent their team. The NFLPA doesn't appoint it's own leaders, they get elected. This argument that the vast majority isn't represented is simply untrue. The blue collar guys are generally the Team representatives. Guys like Witten.

Again tho to be clear the NFL wants to have a hold over these young players even LONGER. That would mean one additional year to hit free agency and thus cost them big time.

Are there players who are hurt right now because 2010 was played under the CBA rules? Yes. Was the NFLPA's best answer to take an 18% pay cut across the board or live with that? YES.

Again, the salary cap started at 34 million per team and is offered at 141 million. That is a lot more money going to every player. And the players who perform at a high level are extremely well compensated as they should be.

Should Kevin Olgetree be well paid? I don't think so. He is aback up who hasn't shown a lot of drive or development. If he doesn't get a second contract am I hurt he had to live on a million bucks over 3 years?? Not at all. If he does develop into a solid 3rd Wr and gets 8 million to play 3 more years am I mad? Not at all. Players should have opportunities to make money based on their performance and guys who make the 53 by the skin of their teeth a couple years shouldn't walk away millionaires imho.

 

[jterrell]

I would say roughly 1.8% of the nfl players are aware of the goings on of the labor dispute (32 player reps out of some 1700 players).

Pay isn't an issue

If Rivers wants to know what's going on perhaps he should ask his Center?
Seeing as that is his Union rep.

 

[DallasEast]

Safe prediction here:
With all of this free time, expect the Rivers family to have another kid (6th ?) by early next year.

Dang that Phillip Rivers! He's even highly competitive with his wife, isn't he? :cunning:

 

[jterrell]

Dang that Phillip Rivers! He's even highly competitive with his wife, isn't he? :cunning:

Well at least he has a legit excuse for not knowing what is going on with the Lock out. He had better things to do.

 

[DallasEast]

Well at least he has a legit excuse for not knowing what is going on with the Lock out. He had better things to do.

True. :laugh1:

 

[CCBoy]

Failing to use English properly doesn't make your weak points any stronger.

Litigation is the ONLY way to prevent a lock out and return pay checks coming in to ALL the players.

When you state 2 million dollars are you talking about per yer? After any bonuses? Or simple base salary which is hardly what they claim on the tax returns?

If a player makes 8 million in signing bonus than a 1 mil base does that count? The money arguments are goofy and arbitrary.

The salary cap has increased by OVER 100 million dollars. That effects EVERY player positively as everyone gets paid more money than they did.

We would not be sitting here in a lockout if 90%/70/50 of the players were being hurt by the CBA. It is completely goofy and just plain dumb to argue that is the case. Not only that but salary changes yearly. Guys who were well under 2 mil per year total compensation get paid quite well when their initial free agency option presents itself. Tom Brady was WELL under 2 million per year at one point. Anyone saying the NFLPA hates him? What about Tony Romo, Miles Austin? Those guys were undrafted free agents.They got 20-25k to come here plus minimum deals. Now they are Rick James.

Point to all the 6th and 7th year guys struggling along and maybe you'd have a point. But that isn't the case. Young guys coming in are generally lower paid guys unless top flight draft picks. That is something the NFL wants to make even more severe. How does that benefit those guys? Does the NFLPA fighting against too much protection for NFL owners not benefit them?

This isn't a tenable argument. It falls apart on every level. Just leave it alone and let it die.

You feel there is NO argument simply because you refuse to look, but then return to ring tapping as if you have some devine hot line.

That you also equate a compound/complex sentence with words that provoke your OWN thinking as poor grammar falls right in line with your insults....UNFOUNDED.

If you weren't trying to win your own game of follow my brilliance, YOU COULD SEE that there are TWO ends of the top and bottom scale that would fail......FAIL. But you have a grand concept of litigation that you cling to with all power hoping it will make you the sharpest tack in the box. There is more than just smoke involved with the owner's actions. But no one in my posts has insinuated beyond identification of those facts as well.

The NFL could fail as a business. Kaching

The more than vast majority STILL go unimproved significantly in comparisons, and the HUGE supporting element of the NFL itself. Kaching

But YOUR own vanitiy doesn't see the requirements to be a Union. It relies upon mediation and step resolutions...NOT litigation.

The Union would seek redress through the LABOR BOARD, not the court. That is for a violation of a Federal Law or contract specific uncomplience.

Now hide some more behind what you either don't simply understand, or just chose to make what you state sound appropriate unto yourself.

Oh, and leave your lame name tossing around language in your own cheap bag of tricks.

But your puffing your chest out and trying to create a Carnival Dragoon in the grandest of Buddhist Celebrations doesn't make yourself Walt Emerson of the Cowboy board...

You use things anyway that you wish so as to ignore pointed out relationships. Try doing as was suggested. You stated that money was spread out well through the league....what were YOU even basing THAT upon. Instead of always refering another to prove out that which you provide nothing but attitude to begin with. State your own standards. I stated a similarly revealing point, and you pick about as if a banty rooster trying to find rock.

 

[CCBoy]

The percentage of players who rate a second contract?
It is quite high if you are talking about players on a 53 man roster to start a season. Even Sam Hurd's of the world get a second contract. You don't have to be a starter.

Now are their plenty of guys who come through practice squads or are late season roster add ons? Yup.

The NFLPA is staffed by voting. Each team has a representative who is voted in and then they vote in other things and get team a vote to represent their team. The NFLPA doesn't appoint it's own leaders, they get elected. This argument that the vast majority isn't represented is simply untrue. The blue collar guys are generally the Team representatives. Guys like Witten.

Again tho to be clear the NFL wants to have a hold over these young players even LONGER. That would mean one additional year to hit free agency and thus cost them big time.

Are there players who are hurt right now because 2010 was played under the CBA rules? Yes. Was the NFLPA's best answer to take an 18% pay cut across the board or live with that? YES.

Again, the salary cap started at 34 million per team and is offered at 141 million. That is a lot more money going to every player. And the players who perform at a high level are extremely well compensated as they should be.

Should Kevin Olgetree be well paid? I don't think so. He is aback up who hasn't shown a lot of drive or development. If he doesn't get a second contract am I hurt he had to live on a million bucks over 3 years?? Not at all. If he does develop into a solid 3rd Wr and gets 8 million to play 3 more years am I mad? Not at all. Players should have opportunities to make money based on their performance and guys who make the 53 by the skin of their teeth a couple years shouldn't walk away millionaires imho.

If I were writing the above...let's see how Y0U would approach that.

Wow, real earth movements there. You just gave an oath of reaffirmation to the process of free enterprise.

Now, you didn't approach the great gulfs of desparity involved, in the sea of ownership where health and RESPONSIBILITY for the league resides.

You even ignore the painfully suffering former players in your focus, as well justify not highlighting and expanding receipt of gross revenues directly to level of play, and not earning potentials. How convenient and ring tapping of yourself.

You successfully point out that the very select and small group of highlight players want an even larger piece of gross revenues, cap expansion and further dominance, and additionaly added endorsements and even more revenues NOT being considered under a similar umbrella that the NFL owners have with the media as well.

You claim focus, and others simply see BIAS. :shoot4:

 

[CCBoy]

The percentage of players who rate a second contract?
It is quite high if you are talking about players on a 53 man roster to start a season. Even Sam Hurd's of the world get a second contract. You don't have to be a starter.

Now are their plenty of guys who come through practice squads or are late season roster add ons? Yup.

The NFLPA is staffed by voting. Each team has a representative who is voted in and then they vote in other things and get team a vote to represent their team. The NFLPA doesn't appoint it's own leaders, they get elected. This argument that the vast majority isn't represented is simply untrue. The blue collar guys are generally the Team representatives. Guys like Witten.

Again tho to be clear the NFL wants to have a hold over these young players even LONGER. That would mean one additional year to hit free agency and thus cost them big time.

Are there players who are hurt right now because 2010 was played under the CBA rules? Yes. Was the NFLPA's best answer to take an 18% pay cut across the board or live with that? YES.

Again, the salary cap started at 34 million per team and is offered at 141 million. That is a lot more money going to every player. And the players who perform at a high level are extremely well compensated as they should be.

Should Kevin Olgetree be well paid? I don't think so. He is aback up who hasn't shown a lot of drive or development. If he doesn't get a second contract am I hurt he had to live on a million bucks over 3 years?? Not at all. If he does develop into a solid 3rd Wr and gets 8 million to play 3 more years am I mad? Not at all. Players should have opportunities to make money based on their performance and guys who make the 53 by the skin of their teeth a couple years shouldn't walk away millionaires imho.

It is evident that you place a lot of rocks in your proverbial basket, yet fail to see the source of your own moorings.

The contract between the team and player is the source of stability in the market place. The length of that contract places the largest balance of retainability upon a player...not a league policy for free agency. The player could just as easily hold out in a manner that Emmitt Smith did, and seek a changed or new contract.

One can look at a lower skilled or younger player and state that he simply does not have remedy. But that is incorrect, he has due process available to himself as well. That is called legal protections, and is part of both State and Federal levels of redress by that person.

What you ignore, in a Rebel's view of the spirits involved in conflict, is that there are built in protections already to the beginning level player's advantage as well. First, in receiving a rookie's first contract, he is given the projection of a three to five year contract from the onset.

Go ahead, and stick one's head into the sand on this element...and say, but he can't get the 'big bucks' yet. Well, that would strike the lead element that you state justify the current litigations. Get ALL that the market can possibly bear.

But you miss a tremendous and supporting element to the draft. The draft is a supporting element to fair play throughout the league. It is structured so as to allow the incoming and collegiate player an opportunity to showcase his skill set and to earn rankings based upon his individual talents and skill set. This affords him also, an elevated value from which to sign is initial contract.

One can say that opportunity to circumvent these types of contracts should be absolved with a group filing of a brief and taking considerations of merit to a court and basing that upon gross earnings as the cornerstone.

Based upon concepts, every senior citizen of the entire country could have similar cause for actions with such basic principals of Social Security payments as well as Medicare not reflecting Gross National Incomes as well. You want that big a can of worms? The abiding principals are EXACTLY the same.

But when, as in a free enterprise system, the focus returns to compliance of unexecuted elements in the document itself, then stability on both sides is secured. It gives all players, just not the top levels, a stable market for individual growth and developments.

The structuring of a growth process is relevant to the bottom levels of the league. The league has developed a system of player evaluations and scouting. That costs a small fortune. It is individually assumed by the team.

Then there are annual schools, training sessions, group activities, and further player developments that assists in the transferal of both conditioning and strength improvements as well as skill sets and technique training necessary for the player to succeed and grow into a dominant future role with the parent or even future team. This expense once again, goes to the team.

Team directions, in today's NFL, are now centered and built around the concept of the draft itself. This aides both the league and it's players, as I stated previously. But here, focus upon a collective bargaining tool, and individual maximization doesn't give underlying concepts venting. But they are additionally vital to the industry.

The draft is a concept developed at the league level, but it is paid for at the Individual Team Levels. That comes with direct expenses as well as commitment by a whole franchise to a select group of youthful and entering players to the health and vitality of it's entire group. That is no SMALL commitment and sacrifice for the good of the entire NFL at the onset. If a challenge to the system would apply directly, it would be first at the level of the TEAM and NOT the players in a challenge.

As a group negotiated aspect, and contractual need to satisfy elements, a negotiated and safeguard is already inplace for their mutual benefits. That annually, many drafted players, before complying with any element of a contract, ALREADY have benefits that most current and producing players do NOT receive at similar levels.

There already exists a lucrative and 'unearned' benefits package to the destinct advantage of entrance level players. As to low level entrance players, they already are far above and exceed National levels of income at the onset, no matter the level that a players arrives upon a roster, and thus comes under the expectation of an individual and binding contract as well.

But the pervading concept again, here, returns to an individually negotiated contract between player and parent organization, or team.

What is not being seen, is the necessity and actual benefits that a player already receives for a draft scenario and resulting contracts and benefits even before he produces and provides ANY contractual compliance of which.

Then there is the moorings that such a system in sports, provides the fan himself. There are tremendous satisfaction as well as enjoyment in sports, that attaches with the following of individual players and their growth or failures with a fan's chosen team. This is an element of sportsmanship as well. That is a vital element to the venue of sports itself. The supporting element that isn't solely reflected in stats of accomplishments, but in the playing of that sport and viewed by a fan.

That is an essential element at concept that is relevant as well. It is also a backdrop of principals that apply in and through the base elements of contract. The conceptualization of a base level of operations and play throughout an entire league, results in changes in the teams arriving at the playoffs as well as challenging for a Lombardi. Without the current moorings of a draft as well as cap, there would have been a rather large group of never-been-there's as in other sports venues.

There are concepts behind even the formulation of a binding contract in the free market. To remove a marriage of concepts in their support, only mars the final product as well.

A group, under anti-trust actions on the books today, can file a petition for anything it so chooses. That falls into the arena of accessability of our own court systems. What it does NOT do, is address the underlying principals of wisdoms that support the very system that such action receives entitlements from.

Sanctioned doesn't equate directly to wisdom, simply, and to the point.

 

[jterrell]

It is evident that you place a lot of rocks in your proverbial basket, yet fail to see the source of your own moorings.

The contract between the team and player is the source of stability in the market place. The length of that contract places the largest balance of retainability upon a player...not a league policy for free agency. The player could just as easily hold out in a manner that Emmitt Smith did, and seek a changed or new contract.

One can look at a lower skilled or younger player and state that he simply does not have remedy. But that is incorrect, he has due process available to himself as well. That is called legal protections, and is part of both State and Federal levels of redress by that person.

What you ignore, in a Rebel's view of the spirits involved in conflict, is that there are built in protections already to the beginning level player's advantage as well. First, in receiving a rookie's first contract, he is given the projection of a three to five year contract from the onset.

Go ahead, and stick one's head into the sand on this element...and say, but he can't get the 'big bucks' yet. Well, that would strike the lead element that you state justify the current litigations. Get ALL that the market can possibly bear.

But you miss a tremendous and supporting element to the draft. The draft is a supporting element to fair play throughout the league. It is structured so as to allow the incoming and collegiate player an opportunity to showcase his skill set and to earn rankings based upon his individual talents and skill set. This affords him also, an elevated value from which to sign is initial contract.

One can say that opportunity to circumvent these types of contracts should be absolved with a group filing of a brief and taking considerations of merit to a court and basing that upon gross earnings as the cornerstone.

Based upon concepts, every senior citizen of the entire country could have similar cause for actions with such basic principals of Social Security payments as well as Medicare not reflecting Gross National Incomes as well. You want that big a can of worms? The abiding principals are EXACTLY the same.

But when, as in a free enterprise system, the focus returns to compliance of unexecuted elements in the document itself, then stability on both sides is secured. It gives all players, just not the top levels, a stable market for individual growth and developments.

The structuring of a growth process is relevant to the bottom levels of the league. The league has developed a system of player evaluations and scouting. That costs a small fortune. It is individually assumed by the team.

Then there are annual schools, training sessions, group activities, and further player developments that assists in the transferal of both conditioning and strength improvements as well as skill sets and technique training necessary for the player to succeed and grow into a dominant future role with the parent or even future team. This expense once again, goes to the team.

Team directions, in today's NFL, are now centered and built around the concept of the draft itself. This aides both the league and it's players, as I stated previously. But here, focus upon a collective bargaining tool, and individual maximization doesn't give underlying concepts venting. But they are additionally vital to the industry.

The draft is a concept developed at the league level, but it is paid for at the Individual Team Levels. That comes with direct expenses as well as commitment by a whole franchise to a select group of youthful and entering players to the health and vitality of it's entire group. That is no SMALL commitment and sacrifice for the good of the entire NFL at the onset. If a challenge to the system would apply directly, it would be first at the level of the TEAM and NOT the players in a challenge.

As a group negotiated aspect, and contractual need to satisfy elements, a negotiated and safeguard is already inplace for their mutual benefits. That annually, many drafted players, before complying with any element of a contract, ALREADY have benefits that most current and producing players do NOT receive at similar levels.

There already exists a lucrative and 'unearned' benefits package to the destinct advantage of entrance level players. As to low level entrance players, they already are far above and exceed National levels of income at the onset, no matter the level that a players arrives upon a roster, and thus comes under the expectation of an individual and binding contract as well.

But the pervading concept again, here, returns to an individually negotiated contract between player and parent organization, or team.

What is not being seen, is the necessity and actual benefits that a player already receives for a draft scenario and resulting contracts and benefits even before he produces and provides ANY contractual compliance of which.

Then there is the moorings that such a system in sports, provides the fan himself. There are tremendous satisfaction as well as enjoyment in sports, that attaches with the following of individual players and their growth or failures with a fan's chosen team. This is an element of sportsmanship as well. That is a vital element to the venue of sports itself. The supporting element that isn't solely reflected in stats of accomplishments, but in the playing of that sport and viewed by a fan.

That is an essential element at concept that is relevant as well. It is also a backdrop of principals that apply in and through the base elements of contract. The conceptualization of a base level of operations and play throughout an entire league, results in changes in the teams arriving at the playoffs as well as challenging for a Lombardi. Without the current moorings of a draft as well as cap, there would have been a rather large group of never-been-there's as in other sports venues.

There are concepts behind even the formulation of a binding contract in the free market. To remove a marriage of concepts in their support, only mars the final product as well.

A group, under anti-trust actions on the books today, can file a petition for anything it so chooses. That falls into the arena of accessability of our own court systems. What it does NOT do, is address the underlying principals of wisdoms that support the very system that such action receives entitlements from.

Sanctioned doesn't equate directly to wisdom, simply, and to the point.

You could have saved a lot of typing by just saying ... ... ... ... I am rain man .. .. .. ..

That might as well as be in hieroglyphics for all the actual sense it made in English.

I don't intentionally ignore points you make, you just don't make many.

There is something in your gibberish regarding contracts. No idea what point you mean to make but yes contracts are the means for players and teams to reach agreements over compensation and participation. Neither side has a gun held to their held over those contracts. They sign them of their own free will. And either side can basically opt out. Teams can cut players and players can hold out. Teams have more power over the contract but both sides have remedies if they later disagree with a contract.

And therein lies reason 40 or 50 or 60 the owners side is so difficult to actually stomach. They choose to sign these players to these deals. They control their own budget. They can at any time make business decisions regarding a player. When a guy gets cut because he is too expensive people don't weep in the streets. It is an accepted part of the game. But that's apparently not good enough. Owners want protections from themselves and each other. They want a guarantee they won't spend X amount. And no sooner than they get a guarantee they'll look to get around it and spend more. It's like going to the store and shopping til you drop, spending more than you were supposed to spend so you go back to the store saying I want a discount because i can't afford all this stuff... but I still want all the stuff. So just refund me some money....

The owners side makes no sense in any context, not even rain man.

 

[CCBoy]

You could have saved a lot of typing by just saying ... ... ... ... I am rain man .. .. .. ..

That might as well as be in hieroglyphics for all the actual sense it made in English.

I don't intentionally ignore points you make, you just don't make many.

There is something in your gibberish regarding contracts. No idea what point you mean to make but yes contracts are the means for players and teams to reach agreements over compensation and participation. Neither side has a gun held to their held over those contracts. They sign them of their own free will. And either side can basically opt out. Teams can cut players and players can hold out. Teams have more power over the contract but both sides have remedies if they later disagree with a contract.

And therein lies reason 40 or 50 or 60 the owners side is so difficult to actually stomach. They choose to sign these players to these deals. They control their own budget. They can at any time make business decisions regarding a player. When a guy gets cut because he is too expensive people don't weep in the streets. It is an accepted part of the game. But that's apparently not good enough. Owners want protections from themselves and each other. They want a guarantee they won't spend X amount. And no sooner than they get a guarantee they'll look to get around it and spend more. It's like going to the store and shopping til you drop, spending more than you were supposed to spend so you go back to the store saying I want a discount because i can't afford all this stuff... but I still want all the stuff. So just refund me some money....

The owners side makes no sense in any context, not even rain man.

Aren't you the popular one today...first, Doomsay and now me: Get a life, or actually start discussing topic instead of just presenting insult after another...in other words,

Like you are a magnet and have trouble deciphering what the equator is...

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

:blind:

If all them players had not taken "Communications Arts" degrees or taken such remedial-level classes, they might understand the memos sent by the players assocaition . . . I mean the players group.
Pro footballplayers, bless their hearts, for all the joy and action they provide us with on autumn and winter Sundays, are generally a pretty dumb bunch of humanity. yes, some of you will pipe up and say they is smart and stuff but I dissent.

I say they are intelekually low level guys in a positive way, because they dont need no smrts like me, they is rich and dumber than doornails and they like it that way. Less thinking, less stress. Damn, now where did I place that Mensa quarterly magazine . . . .

 

[jterrell]

Aren't you the popular one today...first, Doomsay and now me: Get a life, or actually start discussing topic instead of just presenting insult after another...in other words,

Like you are a magnet and have trouble deciphering what the equator is...

I am not insulting either of you. I am pointing out facts clearly in evidence based upon your posts.

Dooms means well but he posts things with an absolute authority as if deemed correct by God and yet produces zero evidence any of it is correct. Much of it takes 30 seconds to disprove with a google search. Everyone has faulty opinions which is why everyone should bother to do a little research.

You clearly type in future perfect and other archaic tenses that would result in failing English grades and basically result in headaches for most who attempt to read that nonsense. If you have a condition that forces such writing I am more than willing to apologize but instead it appears to be willful and pointless schtick. it is clear you are quite bright and it is a shame IMHO you hide behind gamesmanship and silliness instead of offering a more honest debate.

Also notice I am not big on whining or claiming the victim role even if people circumvent language filters and the spirit of the rules here to insult me via profanity and other means. I am a big boy and can handle that. I also speak clearly enough to be understood and provide data to back my arguments as is required by both logic and good manners. That to me is the social contract we enter to debate on this forum.

Translated for you: The comedians have been many but few remain above board and active they do; and lesser numbers still derive pleasures from conversations meaningful and vast and much as childish ways, meander hopelessly into that sweet good night.