Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

These guys deserve $10s of millions!


Bronco Billy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well, maybe not so much...

 

In the preseason, veterans can report no earlier than 15 days before their team's first game. A first day is limited to physicals and meetings, and no pads or contact are allowed in the second and third day of camp. As has been outlined elsewhere, there will be only one padded practice per day. Including walkthroughs, players cannot be on the field more than four hours per day.

 

During the regular season, there can be just 14 padded practices for the entirety of the season, 11 of those sessions must be held in the first 11 weeks, and teams can hold no more than two padded practices per week. One padded practice per week is allowed during the playoffs, and all padded practices are limited to three hours max. Also, a bye week must include at least four consecutive days off, including Saturday.

 

 

Really? Maybe this is part of why pros can't tackle worth a damn. Unless my math is bad, vets practice in full pads a maximum - and that would be an absolute maximum - of 46 total practices through the entire year that starts towards the end of July and ends in January.

 

Holy crap, when I was coaching high school football our kids practiced (and we used a pretty typical regimen) about 50 practices in full pads for a season that started in mid-August and ended in the middle of November.

 

There are certain things you can only do effectively in practice in full pads, including some tackling and line blocking drills, not to mention goal line/short yardage team drills.

 

Yeah, those pros, taking all those incredible risks.

Edited by Bronco Billy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Y'know, BB, I don't think there's anyone left out here who doesn't get that you and the likes of DW are anti-player and pro-owner. You yourself said you'd be glad to get back to bickering about football instead of ranting about how valuable Al Davis is (I paraphrase).

 

Let it go, already. Or, if you prefer, following your theme of players being overpaid and not worth tens of millions (in total defiance of your own free market beliefs), kindly explain why some fat useless twat with a cigar who simply bought an established franchise and had nothing whatsoever to do with it's current value is worth hundreds of millions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Y'know, BB, I don't think there's anyone left out here who doesn't get that you and the likes of DW are anti-player and pro-owner. You yourself said you'd be glad to get back to bickering about football instead of ranting about how valuable Al Davis is (I paraphrase).

 

Let it go, already. Or, if you prefer, following your theme of players being overpaid and not worth tens of millions (in total defiance of your own free market beliefs), kindly explain why some fat useless twat with a cigar who simply bought an established franchise and had nothing whatsoever to do with it's current value is worth hundreds of millions?

 

 

I see I made quite an impression. Whether you have taken it fairly is another matter. In the end perhaps a man can be judged by both his friends and his detractors. If that is so I am comfortable with your impression.

Edited by Ditkaless Wonders
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see I made quite an impression. Whether you have taken it fairly is another matter. In the end perhaps a man can be judged by both his friends and his detractors. If that is so I am comfortable with your impression.

Are you denying being anti-player and pro-owner?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Y'know, BB, I don't think there's anyone left out here who doesn't get that you and the likes of DW are anti-player and pro-owner. You yourself said you'd be glad to get back to bickering about football instead of ranting about how valuable Al Davis is (I paraphrase).

 

Let it go, already. Or, if you prefer, following your theme of players being overpaid and not worth tens of millions (in total defiance of your own free market beliefs), kindly explain why some fat useless twat with a cigar who simply bought an established franchise and had nothing whatsoever to do with it's current value is worth hundreds of millions?

 

That "fat useless twat with a cigar" managed to accumulate enough capital to be capable of purchasing a franchise. Can you? If not, where does that put you in comparison with him? And he put forth the capital to purchase the franchise with the intent of increasing its value over time, managing it for success and long term fiscal responsibility, and benefiting from that. That makes him an evil entity of some kind? Seems to me hundreds of millions of Americans try to do the same thing. Where does that put them in your eyes?

 

The point I was obviously trying to make and that you so carefully missed is that these guys don't seem to want to practice a critically important facet of their skill set enough given the level for which they are being compensated, which by any measure is substantial.

 

My position is and always has been that players are adequately compensated for what they do, not that they should be paid signifcantly less. Now I see this kind of language written into the contract and I see that NFL players actually want to practice their skill sets less than high school players, who make nothing whatsoever from playing and derive their enjoyment from simply playing the game. That attitude bothers me, given the increase in compensation that they are seeking.

 

Now, if you choose not to want to discuss that, that's cool. But why should this be - per your judgment - a topic unworthy of discussion, when this is a FF MB no less? I find it interesting and noteworthy, well deserving of debate, especially when there are those pro-player people here who love to lead with the argument of how much risk they take everyday and how they deserve to be paid more than the owners because of it.

 

You don't want to discuss that? Fine, don't open the freakin' thread, much less take the time to respond.

Edited by Bronco Billy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shamelessly admit that we are. You'd be welcome to join us. What that has to do with the OP though, I have no idea.

 

 

Is Bushwacked in close enough proximity to join us sometime? Perhaps he might like to play some cards, smoke some cigars, and enjoy a single malt, a few beers, and a steak sometime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm always up for a good cigar.

 

Seriously - you'd be entirely welcome. I'm always up for meeting people face to face, and don't hold any animosity towards anyone here. If you live in the Denver area or are passing through, it would be great to get together. It's great to meet new people, especially those with divergent opinions on different matters. Booze, cigars, and cards can smooth over a whole lot and make for interesting discussions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Bushwacked in close enough proximity to join us sometime? Perhaps he might like to play some cards, smoke some cigars, and enjoy a single malt, a few beers, and a steak sometime.

 

I'm in the great Pacific NW. I will be in Denver area in two weeks, but my schedule is full with a wedding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you denying being anti-player and pro-owner?

 

Not sure of his answer, but I am for sure.

 

Gladly admit it.

 

I've wanted the players to take HUGE step backwards during this whole thing.

 

Sounds like more of a fair deal than I would have preferred, but such is life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....and the owners risk, what? Don't worry, I'll wait.

 

There are almost 2,000 players and 32 owners. Between them, the players can't even get half. HALF.

 

Thank you and go away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That "fat useless twat with a cigar" managed to accumulate enough capital to be capable of purchasing a franchise. Can you?

Actually 1/3 of current owners were born into the family who owned a football team. So while their family managed to accumulate enough capital, I don't see why I should be overly impressed with someone given a business.

 

Anyway, as far as missing any real point in this thread, I don't know if I can take serious anybody that concludes # of practices has to do with how much they get paid. If you think it diminishes their skill set than there is very much a case you could make about that. You just wouldn't need to title that thread in some jackass way which begs for people to get off topic. Especially if you are to be taken seriously when you say that you would rather talk about actual football than lockout, millionaire vs. billionaire issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....and the owners risk, what? Don't worry, I'll wait.

 

There are almost 2,000 players and 32 owners. Between them, the players can't even get half. HALF.

 

Thank you and go away.

 

They're getting more than deserve already. I'm thinking labor costs should be closer to the 10-20 percent range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....and the owners risk, what? Don't worry, I'll wait.

 

There are almost 2,000 players and 32 owners. Between them, the players can't even get half. HALF.

 

Thank you and go away.

 

 

There are plenty of stadiums now sitting empty or underused. The players should form their own league and rent out these venues. For starters I think they should use 4 regional stadiums. Each region would have 6 teams. Each Sunday each regional stadium could host 3 games. Games would be fairly fan friendly for tickets and parking. Revenue would come from T.V. contracts. T.V would not have to travel week to week to each stadium to set up. Rather they would have permanent camera placements since they know they would be back each and every week. T.V. would love this. It would cut costs and allow for more thought on camera and microphone placement.

 

Players could have the rules they want, presuming they could agree. See Peyton Manning and Ray Lewis may have different opinions on what is good for the game when it comes to hitting Q.B.'s. In the end I imagine they would start with soem set of existing NFL rules from the last two decades and tweek it from there. The players could celebrate to their hearts content after each play, so long as they could maintain audience interest.

 

Players would have to come up with a way to train and pay refs, insure themselves, and pay for coaching and training facilities, but there just may be an alternate model to the inefficiency of having each team have its own, underutilized palace, a monument to the owner's ego.

 

 

 

The existing league, well they would have to start over not with the top 1900 players in the world, but with the next 1900. They would then have an opportunity upgrade in future drafts or in bidding against the players league for those players. The NFL would have the benefit of knowledge, facilities, licensing, and the fact that they have existing loyalties. I for example would still root for the Packers.

 

It would be interesting to see the dynamic. Who brings more to the game. Do the owners bring anything or do they bring volumes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....and the owners risk, what? Don't worry, I'll wait.

 

There are almost 2,000 players and 32 owners. Between them, the players can't even get half. HALF.

 

Thank you and go away.

 

:wacko:

 

Why do you keep entering threads like this and continuously showing how little you understand how businesses operate? Do you honestly think that player salaries are the only expenses that owners incur?

 

That a select portion of the employees get half of the gross revenues of a company is an astounding ratio in the players' favor. Now you just go on and tell all of how insignificant all other employee salaries, health care costs, debt service, pensions, local state & federal taxes, insurance, venue costs, team and league facilities, marketing, league fees and expenses, travel, housing, lawyers fees, equipment and uniform costs, etc are completely insignificant and meaningless to the game and that the players could run the league on their own.

 

And to square - so accumulating wealth, building a phenominally successful business, growing that success even further, and then passing what you've built on to your hiers is somehow a bad thing in this country?

Edited by Bronco Billy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm fairly sure that the owners are fairly happy to protect their tens of millions of investment by limiting padded practices, too.

 

I'm really curious to see the quality shown at each game. The RB's should have a booming business going by the 3rd game or so. lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information