dtait93 Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 26 minutes ago, ET80 said: Reading this reminds me why the majority of this country is in crippling debt and has no savings to account for. Well, you have to reduce your spending in this scenario. Nobody LIKES to reduce their spending - regardless of why you have to do it - but that doesn't absolve you from HAVING to do it. I mean, what sort of logic are you trying our here? Wow what a concept. Reducing your spending when your desired lifestyle can’t be supported by your means. You should start charging a consulting fee instead of giving out this precious information for free. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 1 minute ago, dtait93 said: Wow what a concept. Reducing your spending when your desired lifestyle can’t be supported by your means. You should start charging a consulting fee instead of giving out this precious information for free. Oh, I'm sending him an invoice later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candyman93 Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 If I’m a lower tiered player that got screwed by the rookie salary cap, I’m not exactly in a “helping” mood. Why would I want the same top tiered guys screwing me out of more money again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malik Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 1 hour ago, candyman93 said: I’ll probably catch heat for this, but here’s a cold reality. You as a consumer, benefit more from a company when the labor force for said company gets screwed and financially taken advantage of. Think about these elements that screw over players, but make your team better: 1. Salary cap 2. Franchise tag 3. Rookie salary cap 4. The draft I'm a Yankees fan and we don't have 3 of things in baseball and I'm perfectly content my man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantZombie Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 9 hours ago, GSUeagles14 said: there is a reason. players are employees, not paetners. it may hurt some peoples feelings but its just facts. they dont deserve 50%. additionally youre complaining that this deal takes care of the majority while somethjng like 10% of guys arent getting enough back. hows that make sense? I think you're misinterpreting what I'm saying. Even at 50% the Owners are still making way more money. There is only 32 of them. I am fine with the majority of the league benefitting from this deal. However when it comes to retired players with disabilities stemming from their career getting the short end of the stick, I dont agree with that. I also dont agree with the notion that employees dont deserve to be appropriately compensated for their contributions and risks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantZombie Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 1 hour ago, Malik said: I'm a Yankees fan and we don't have 3 of things in baseball and I'm perfectly content my man. To be fair, the Yankees are one of the wealthiest teams in a non-capped league so, isnt it fair to say that's at least a little bias of an opinion? (Not saying you're being bias but that comparison is a bit skewed) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSUeagles14 Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 52 minutes ago, wwhickok said: I think you're misinterpreting what I'm saying. Even at 50% the Owners are still making way more money. There is only 32 of them. I am fine with the majority of the league benefitting from this deal. However when it comes to retired players with disabilities stemming from their career getting the short end of the stick, I dont agree with that. I also dont agree with the notion that employees dont deserve to be appropriately compensated for their contributions and risks. no, im really not. it doesnt matter the # of owners, players should not get an equal split as them. they are the employees, again, i understand it may hurt somes feelings that they dont get to make as much as their bosses but thats just the way it goes sometimes. explain in detail how retired players are getting the short end of the stick. who defines what the appropriate amount of compensation is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSUeagles14 Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 2 hours ago, Malik said: I'm a Yankees fan and we don't have 3 of things in baseball and I'm perfectly content my man. this isnt really true. penalties become harsh if you spend over a certain threshold continuously and while theres not a cap on what one player from the draft can get paid, there is a pool that cant reallly be exceeded. so to be factually correct, baseball has forms of 3 out of the 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantZombie Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 1 hour ago, GSUeagles14 said: no, im really not. it doesnt matter the # of owners, players should not get an equal split as them. they are the employees, again, i understand it may hurt somes feelings that they dont get to make as much as their bosses but thats just the way it goes sometimes. explain in detail how retired players are getting the short end of the stick. who defines what the appropriate amount of compensation is? We can agree to disagree. But I think it's fair to say the players also disagree with you. The Players are what truly makes the money. Without them, there is no tv deals, no marketing, no stadium, no wealth lining owners' pockets. The biggest draw to the NFL is the entertainment value and we dont turn a game on to watch the owners. In the NFL, the owners simply arent as important as the players. Additionally, the players, even in a 50/50 split, wouldn't be making as much as the owners. There is 2500 of them vs. 32 owners. It doesnt even compare. Having said that, they still saw a bump in the split and I think the next CBA CBA after this one will be 50/50. Retired Players with disabilities are seeing a reduction in benefits for necessary treatment and that's something I do not agree with. I also feel strongly that the franchise tag should have been eliminated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oregon Ducks Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 6 hours ago, candyman93 said: I’ll probably catch heat for this, but here’s a cold reality. You as a consumer, benefit more from a company when the labor force for said company gets screwed and financially taken advantage of. Lol that’s just not true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantZombie Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 7 hours ago, candyman93 said: I’ll probably catch heat for this, but here’s a cold reality. You as a consumer, benefit more from a company when the labor force for said company gets screwed and financially taken advantage of. I dont agree with that at all. First of all I dont think the Salary cap or rookie pay scale are forms of screwing players over. Additionally, I do think the Franchise Tag is a form of such treatment and I wish theyd get rid of it, I hate it. I'm also not sure how the draft is a form of players getting screwed. Its what initially creates their opportunity. They have the option to hold out and not sign a contract it's just not smart business. As a consumer, I want the players to get a fair deal. I get no benefit or enjoyment out of seeing players get screwed over. At the same time, there are many players vastly overpaid, could you not suggest teams get taken advantage of by average players due to market inflation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSUeagles14 Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 6 hours ago, wwhickok said: We can agree to disagree. But I think it's fair to say the players also disagree with you. The Players are what truly makes the money. Without them, there is no tv deals, no marketing, no stadium, no wealth lining owners' pockets. The biggest draw to the NFL is the entertainment value and we dont turn a game on to watch the owners. In the NFL, the owners simply arent as important as the players. Additionally, the players, even in a 50/50 split, wouldn't be making as much as the owners. There is 2500 of them vs. 32 owners. It doesnt even compare. Having said that, they still saw a bump in the split and I think the next CBA CBA after this one will be 50/50. Retired Players with disabilities are seeing a reduction in benefits for necessary treatment and that's something I do not agree with. I also feel strongly that the franchise tag should have been eliminated. players change, the league stays around. and you have a lot of feelings and opinions with very little to back it up with. im not even going to continue to debate the #of of owners thing just cause it lacks so much sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candyman93 Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 (edited) 5 hours ago, wwhickok said: I dont agree with that at all. First of all I dont think the Salary cap or rookie pay scale are forms of screwing players over. Additionally, I do think the Franchise Tag is a form of such treatment and I wish theyd get rid of it, I hate it. I'm also not sure how the draft is a form of players getting screwed. Its what initially creates their opportunity. They have the option to hold out and not sign a contract it's just not smart business. As a consumer, I want the players to get a fair deal. I get no benefit or enjoyment out of seeing players get screwed over. At the same time, there are many players vastly overpaid, could you not suggest teams get taken advantage of by average players due to market inflation? As a fan, I support these policies put into place. Without them, players will flock to bigger markets. That is the reality of a capitalistic society. Get as much money as you can. I absolutely agree average players get overpaid. Different sport, but the NBA is a perfect example. Mike Conley at one point was getting paid more than LBJ. Putting a cap on anything means player X, no matter how good he is, can only earn Y amount of dollars. How truly valuable was a prime Brady and Manning? More than what they actually got paid. Edited March 11, 2020 by candyman93 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waterfish_21 Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 12 hours ago, dtait93 said: Wow what a concept. Reducing your spending when your desired lifestyle can’t be supported by your means. You should start charging a consulting fee instead of giving out this precious information for free. The people who need this advice won't be able to pay him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vorsutus Posted March 12, 2020 Share Posted March 12, 2020 On 3/10/2020 at 12:09 AM, SkippyX said: The new deal will double and then triple minimum salaries. It will offer much more in incentive pay so the 5th round pick who is a star can make an extra 500k as a rookie because his play determined his pay. Clowns like Russel Okung and Aaron Rodgers want those players mad at the owners instead of the stars and their greedy agents. If the players do reject this deal, they should push for individual caps on salaries so everyone gets what they deserve for risking their health which all the rich guys seem to care a lot about. 5% of the cap sounds about right to me. Make them eligible for the incentive pay as well so the MVP can still make 16 million instead of 10. I don't watch the NFL so that Aaron Rodgers grandkids can each inherit 10 million dollars. Ok so the guy who costs enough to make another guy only make 600k is a bigger *** than the guy who takes home 200mil for doing nothing? With a few exceptions like jerry jones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.