Old Guy Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 12 hours ago, VonKarman said: 31M against the cap is not such a high number. The total cap is 255 million. Tua needs to get paid as well. You realize it's 12% of the total cap? It's insanely stupid money for a cap number in any year for a WR on a team that thinks they have the roster to compete for a Super Bowl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighCalebR Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 24 minutes ago, Old Guy said: The total cap is 255 million. Tua needs to get paid as well. You realize it's 12% of the total cap? It's insanely stupid money for a cap number in any year for a WR on a team that thinks they have the roster to compete for a Super Bowl. They let Wilkins go be a top paid DT so they could pay 2 WRs top money. That always works out great for teams. Everyone always says neglect the trenches and beef up WR 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 40 minutes ago, HighCalebR said: They let Wilkins go be a top paid DT so they could pay 2 WRs top money. That always works out great for teams. Everyone always says neglect the trenches and beef up WR This made me laugh! I didn't realize Wilkins was already 28 years old. He's 2 1/2 months younger than Kenny Clarke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skibrett15 Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 19 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said: I find the Aiyuk proclamations to be bizarre. I get a reggie wayne vibe from him though. Someone who could do more if given the opportunity Still, more of a rising star type who I have my eye on than someone who "has arrived" I'd be surprised if he was better than Marvin Harrison Jr. this coming season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted May 31 Author Share Posted May 31 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Leader said: NFL better think before doing this. It will backfire bigtime here. Greed will get you eventually. This would be the equivalent of The Champions League soccer having their finals over here. Never say never, but that isn't happening. Edited May 31 by Old Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Are they planning on a 9 am kickoff? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 I think kicking off the Superbowl at like 1 Eastern wouldn't be unreasonable. I'm not sure TV would be happy about it though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgbeethree Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 hour ago, Old Guy said: This would be the equivalent of The Champions League soccer having their finals over here. Never say never, but that isn't happening. It's more of an equivalent to when an average joe gets "upset" that a famous super model gets married because now they don't have a shot. Realistically there is a near zero percent chance having a Super Bowl in London affects an average fan. The only difference between a game in London vs. a game in the states is about $500 in the cost of flights. Nobody is really going, I might have dropped $10 grand to go to the SB (probably a pretty low estimate) but I have to draw the line at spending $10,500. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighCalebR Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 3 hours ago, Leader said: As long as it's at America time I don't give a **** about the place. It's not priced for me Joe's anyways, so if you're willing to dish for a ticket might as well get an international trip in anyways. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighCalebR Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 55 minutes ago, wgbeethree said: It's more of an equivalent to when an average joe gets "upset" that a famous super model gets married because now they don't have a shot. Realistically there is a near zero percent chance having a Super Bowl in London affects an average fan. The only difference between a game in London vs. a game in the states is about $500 in the cost of flights. Nobody is really going, I might have dropped $10 grand to go to the SB (probably a pretty low estimate) but I have to draw the line at spending $10,500. Could've just read this before I posted. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 hour ago, wgbeethree said: It's more of an equivalent to when an average joe gets "upset" that a famous super model gets married because now they don't have a shot. Realistically there is a near zero percent chance having a Super Bowl in London affects an average fan. The only difference between a game in London vs. a game in the states is about $500 in the cost of flights. Nobody is really going, I might have dropped $10 grand to go to the SB (probably a pretty low estimate) but I have to draw the line at spending $10,500. I think we should have our 250-year celebration of the birth of the USA in London as well in 2026. What difference does it make? It's only an additional 500-dollar flight to get over there. Afterall, we won our independence from them in a war. Do you have any idea how many people go to the host city for the parties and just to be there? The revenue the Super Bowl generates for a city is a massive economic boost to their economy. Love you man, but your narrow view of this subject falls flat IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatZepp Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 (edited) 1 hour ago, Old Guy said: I think we should have our 250-year celebration of the birth of the USA in London as well in 2026. What difference does it make? It's only an additional 500-dollar flight to get over there. Afterall, we won our independence from them in a war. Do you have any idea how many people go to the host city for the parties and just to be there? The revenue the Super Bowl generates for a city is a massive economic boost to their economy. Love you man, but your narrow view of this subject falls flat IMO. This is the downfall here, too many cities pitch “we’ll bring a Super Bowl to town if we build a new stadium!” The next city asking for taxpayer funding while the Super Bowl is overseas will have a hard time! Edited May 31 by TheGreatZepp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgbeethree Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 hour ago, Old Guy said: I think we should have our 250-year celebration of the birth of the USA in London as well in 2026. What difference does it make? It's only an additional 500-dollar flight to get over there. Afterall, we won our independence from them in a war. Do you have any idea how many people go to the host city for the parties and just to be there? The revenue the Super Bowl generates for a city is a massive economic boost to their economy. Love you man, but your narrow view of this subject falls flat IMO. You're right. I hadn't bothered to take into consideration either of the irrelevant and slightly unhinged jingoism or the staggering success of trickle down enoconomics angles when forming my opinion. You've won yourself a convert. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 32 minutes ago, wgbeethree said: You're right. I hadn't bothered to take into consideration either of the irrelevant and slightly unhinged jingoism or the staggering success of trickle down enoconomics angles when forming my opinion. You've won yourself a convert. Got to give you a football for the use of jingoism. Well played. 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.