Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Music, books, movies, TV, games, hobbies, food, and potent potables. And forum games! Pour a drink, put on your smoking jacket, light a pipe (of whatever), and settle in.
User avatar
Taktix®
Posts: 7685
Joined: 07 May 2010, 05:29
Location: The Caribbean

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by Taktix® » 27 Sep 2017, 12:27

Warren wrote:
27 Sep 2017, 11:27
Taktix® wrote:
27 Sep 2017, 10:27
I saw Bob Costas talking somewhere in the last week (before the weekend of Kneelgate), and he said:

a) Pee Wee football enrollment is waaaaaay down in the last 5 years.
b) There's talk of switching all pre-college football to flag/touch variants so that tackle football could only be played by 18+ year-olds signing consent waivers.
c) No amount of padding currently in use or development does anything for CTE, because the point of impact is between the brain and the inside of the skull, which can only be alleviated by eliminating the rapid deceleration/directional change inherent in tackling.

Pair these with my personal theory that professional football is increasingly fake/rigged, and I doubt the sport will exist in any currently recognizable form in 20 years...
Yeah. Uh-huh. Yep. Righ... Wait what?
I've mentioned a few times previously that I have an increasing suspicion that the NFL is rigged.

It's not unheard of: baseball and basketball have been beset by rigging scandals in the past. Politically connected teams suddenly start winning, such as the Steelers during Dan Rooney's tenure as Ambassador to Ireland, or last year's miraculous Patriots comeback just a few short weeks after Robert Kraft donated a cool $1 Mil to Trump's inaugural committee. Is it a coincidence the Saints have sucked forever, except that one year after the Superdome opened following Katrina?

I mean, look, I couldn't prove it in court or anything, but there's been quite a few smaller incidents over the years that I can't recall right now that have led me to wonder if the whole thing's rigged. It's not important enough in the big picture of life for me to really research and investigate, but it certainly has detracted from my enjoyment of the sport over the last decade or so (well, that and fantasy football's influence)...
"Guilty as charged. Go ahead and ban me from the mall." - Ellie

User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 3146
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by Painboy » 27 Sep 2017, 15:00

Shem wrote:
27 Sep 2017, 02:02
Painboy wrote:
26 Sep 2017, 23:55
Back in the day you didn't need great QBs to win games because you could pay all of your all pros to stick around forever. Look at Terry Bradshaw's numbers. They weren't terribly impressive, but with that team around him you could have put almost anyone in there and had success. Take Manning away from the Colts and we could see how they did. Oh wait that did happen and they weren't quite so formidable.
Back in the day you didn't have to worry about paying your pros, because free agency wasn't a thing, so even if they wanted to leave, there was nowhere for them to go, because league rules and gentlemen's agreements between owners meant nobody would take them. The Rozelle Rule meant the commissioner could award money and draft picks to a team who lost a player, taken from the team that signed him. Then, after that went away in the late 70s, Plan B let the owners protect 37 players of their choice. It kept wages low and gave clubs all the power. There was a reason why Steve Young and Reggie White went to the USFL even though it was brand new and kind of a joke. The only reason they instituted a salary cap was because their nice little cartel was disrupted. In 1992. Two years later, they had a cap. Free agency has done more to bring the parity your taking about than the cap has.

(Just to make it clear how little the NFL was paying, Bradshaw's rookie contract was $25,000 per year plus a $100,000 signing bonus spread out over 10 years. By the end of his career he was at about $470,000, and was the 4th highest paid player in the league.)
Yes those were shitty rules for the players but only reinforces my point about teams being able to keep all their good players making the league less competitive. That's why when they opened up free agency in the 90s they also instituted the salary cap because otherwise big market teams would have too much of competitive advantage.

User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 3146
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by Painboy » 27 Sep 2017, 15:07

Taktix® wrote:
27 Sep 2017, 12:27
Warren wrote:
27 Sep 2017, 11:27
Taktix® wrote:
27 Sep 2017, 10:27
I saw Bob Costas talking somewhere in the last week (before the weekend of Kneelgate), and he said:

a) Pee Wee football enrollment is waaaaaay down in the last 5 years.
b) There's talk of switching all pre-college football to flag/touch variants so that tackle football could only be played by 18+ year-olds signing consent waivers.
c) No amount of padding currently in use or development does anything for CTE, because the point of impact is between the brain and the inside of the skull, which can only be alleviated by eliminating the rapid deceleration/directional change inherent in tackling.

Pair these with my personal theory that professional football is increasingly fake/rigged, and I doubt the sport will exist in any currently recognizable form in 20 years...
Yeah. Uh-huh. Yep. Righ... Wait what?
I've mentioned a few times previously that I have an increasing suspicion that the NFL is rigged.

It's not unheard of: baseball and basketball have been beset by rigging scandals in the past. Politically connected teams suddenly start winning, such as the Steelers during Dan Rooney's tenure as Ambassador to Ireland, or last year's miraculous Patriots comeback just a few short weeks after Robert Kraft donated a cool $1 Mil to Trump's inaugural committee. Is it a coincidence the Saints have sucked forever, except that one year after the Superdome opened following Katrina?

I mean, look, I couldn't prove it in court or anything, but there's been quite a few smaller incidents over the years that I can't recall right now that have led me to wonder if the whole thing's rigged. It's not important enough in the big picture of life for me to really research and investigate, but it certainly has detracted from my enjoyment of the sport over the last decade or so (well, that and fantasy football's influence)...
I think your falling into confirmation bias. The number of people that would need to be involved in it would be too large to keep under wraps. Games like basketball or baseball can be swung relatively easily with only a few conspirators in on it. Football is far too random in it's events for only a few people to have a major influence on any one game. The game can completely turn around in an instant on one or two plays making it extremely difficult to rig without a substantial portion of each team in on it.

User avatar
Shem
Posts: 6604
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 00:27

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by Shem » 27 Sep 2017, 15:47

Painboy wrote:
27 Sep 2017, 15:00
Shem wrote:
27 Sep 2017, 02:02
Painboy wrote:
26 Sep 2017, 23:55
Back in the day you didn't need great QBs to win games because you could pay all of your all pros to stick around forever. Look at Terry Bradshaw's numbers. They weren't terribly impressive, but with that team around him you could have put almost anyone in there and had success. Take Manning away from the Colts and we could see how they did. Oh wait that did happen and they weren't quite so formidable.
Back in the day you didn't have to worry about paying your pros, because free agency wasn't a thing, so even if they wanted to leave, there was nowhere for them to go, because league rules and gentlemen's agreements between owners meant nobody would take them. The Rozelle Rule meant the commissioner could award money and draft picks to a team who lost a player, taken from the team that signed him. Then, after that went away in the late 70s, Plan B let the owners protect 37 players of their choice. It kept wages low and gave clubs all the power. There was a reason why Steve Young and Reggie White went to the USFL even though it was brand new and kind of a joke. The only reason they instituted a salary cap was because their nice little cartel was disrupted. In 1992. Two years later, they had a cap. Free agency has done more to bring the parity your taking about than the cap has.

(Just to make it clear how little the NFL was paying, Bradshaw's rookie contract was $25,000 per year plus a $100,000 signing bonus spread out over 10 years. By the end of his career he was at about $470,000, and was the 4th highest paid player in the league.)
Yes those were shitty rules for the players but only reinforces my point about teams being able to keep all their good players making the league less competitive. That's why when they opened up free agency in the 90s they also instituted the salary cap because otherwise big market teams would have too much of competitive advantage.
But that's not what you said; you said big market teams controlled the league through the use of money ("paying your pros to stick around"). Which they didn't; it was through collusion that benefited all over, rich and poor, at the expense of players. You may be right that there'd be an arms race that'd leave poorer owners behind absent a salary cap, but the situation you provided doesn't support your assertion.
"VOTE SHEMOCRACY! You will only have to do it once!" -Loyalty Officer Aresen

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 21840
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by Warren » 27 Sep 2017, 16:45

Parity is overrated. Every so often an underdog team gets it together in a big way. That is far more exciting to watch and wait for than rotating the big stick.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 3146
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by Painboy » 27 Sep 2017, 17:08

Shem wrote:
27 Sep 2017, 15:47
Painboy wrote:
27 Sep 2017, 15:00
Shem wrote:
27 Sep 2017, 02:02
Painboy wrote:
26 Sep 2017, 23:55
Back in the day you didn't need great QBs to win games because you could pay all of your all pros to stick around forever. Look at Terry Bradshaw's numbers. They weren't terribly impressive, but with that team around him you could have put almost anyone in there and had success. Take Manning away from the Colts and we could see how they did. Oh wait that did happen and they weren't quite so formidable.
Back in the day you didn't have to worry about paying your pros, because free agency wasn't a thing, so even if they wanted to leave, there was nowhere for them to go, because league rules and gentlemen's agreements between owners meant nobody would take them. The Rozelle Rule meant the commissioner could award money and draft picks to a team who lost a player, taken from the team that signed him. Then, after that went away in the late 70s, Plan B let the owners protect 37 players of their choice. It kept wages low and gave clubs all the power. There was a reason why Steve Young and Reggie White went to the USFL even though it was brand new and kind of a joke. The only reason they instituted a salary cap was because their nice little cartel was disrupted. In 1992. Two years later, they had a cap. Free agency has done more to bring the parity your taking about than the cap has.

(Just to make it clear how little the NFL was paying, Bradshaw's rookie contract was $25,000 per year plus a $100,000 signing bonus spread out over 10 years. By the end of his career he was at about $470,000, and was the 4th highest paid player in the league.)
Yes those were shitty rules for the players but only reinforces my point about teams being able to keep all their good players making the league less competitive. That's why when they opened up free agency in the 90s they also instituted the salary cap because otherwise big market teams would have too much of competitive advantage.
But that's not what you said; you said big market teams controlled the league through the use of money ("paying your pros to stick around"). Which they didn't; it was through collusion that benefited all over, rich and poor, at the expense of players. You may be right that there'd be an arms race that'd leave poorer owners behind absent a salary cap, but the situation you provided doesn't support your assertion.
Hmm looking back at the early posts I'm honestly not sure why past me wrote that. I may have gotten the two concepts conflated in my head at the time. Apologies.

So after a quick refresher at wikipedia to check my facts the reason they adopted the salary cap was to prevent big market teams outspending smaller market teams because the 1993 CBA allowed unrestricted FA after 4 years. I think that's what I was initially pointing out.

User avatar
JD
Posts: 9611
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:26

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by JD » 28 Sep 2017, 15:43

In the company pantry, I found a Giants-branded can of Pepsi. I immediately thought, "Hey, an overhyped can of soda that will stumble along halfheartedly before concluding with a typically mediocre finish." And, of course, I'll drink it anyway.

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 21090
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by Mo » 01 Oct 2017, 19:57

Right wingers: We just want people to respect the flag. You can ask for equality and we'd support that
Ravens: Ok, we're going to kneel before the national anthem and pray for equality, unity and justice
RWs: Booooooooooo!
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Highway
Posts: 12160
Joined: 12 May 2011, 00:22
Location: the Electric Ocean

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by Highway » 01 Oct 2017, 21:01

Mo wrote:
01 Oct 2017, 19:57
Right wingers: We just want people to respect the flag. You can ask for equality and we'd support that
Ravens: Ok, we're going to kneel before the national anthem and pray for equality, unity and justice
RWs: Booooooooooo!
1) Baltimore fans are shitheads. B)the football stadium isn't exactly the place for nuanced thinking. iii)Baltimore fans are shitheads.
"Sharks do not go around challenging people to games of chance like dojo breakers."

User avatar
Highway
Posts: 12160
Joined: 12 May 2011, 00:22
Location: the Electric Ocean

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by Highway » 01 Oct 2017, 21:09

Highway wrote:
01 Oct 2017, 21:01
Mo wrote:
01 Oct 2017, 19:57
Right wingers: We just want people to respect the flag. You can ask for equality and we'd support that
Ravens: Ok, we're going to kneel before the national anthem and pray for equality, unity and justice
RWs: Booooooooooo!
1) Baltimore fans are shitheads. B)the football stadium isn't exactly the place for nuanced thinking. iii)Baltimore fans are shitheads.
To expand on this a little, the people going to the Ravens games aren't the people who riot in Baltimore. They're not the people who sympathize with the rioters. They're the ones who wish the stadiums were up in Towson so that they wouldn't have to go to South Baltimore to see the games, because eww, they have to go through all those "bad" neighborhoods to get to their tailgate lot (all of 3 blocks from I-95). And that's not even West Baltimore, or North Avenue, or anywhere that's actually what I'd call 'bad neighborhood'. "Oooh, we had to get off on MLK Blvd! I had to lock the doors on the Lexus!" They are the people who sit on chat boards and say "If there was a protest on the street, I'd just drive through them, because they're illegally blocking the road!"
"Sharks do not go around challenging people to games of chance like dojo breakers."

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 21090
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by Mo » 01 Oct 2017, 22:05

Highway wrote:
01 Oct 2017, 21:09
Highway wrote:
01 Oct 2017, 21:01
Mo wrote:
01 Oct 2017, 19:57
Right wingers: We just want people to respect the flag. You can ask for equality and we'd support that
Ravens: Ok, we're going to kneel before the national anthem and pray for equality, unity and justice
RWs: Booooooooooo!
1) Baltimore fans are shitheads. B)the football stadium isn't exactly the place for nuanced thinking. iii)Baltimore fans are shitheads.
To expand on this a little, the people going to the Ravens games aren't the people who riot in Baltimore. They're not the people who sympathize with the rioters. They're the ones who wish the stadiums were up in Towson so that they wouldn't have to go to South Baltimore to see the games, because eww, they have to go through all those "bad" neighborhoods to get to their tailgate lot (all of 3 blocks from I-95). And that's not even West Baltimore, or North Avenue, or anywhere that's actually what I'd call 'bad neighborhood'. "Oooh, we had to get off on MLK Blvd! I had to lock the doors on the Lexus!" They are the people who sit on chat boards and say "If there was a protest on the street, I'd just drive through them, because they're illegally blocking the road!"
Oh I get it. But the prior talking point was, "We don't mind the sentiment, but respect the flag." The mask has slipped and they're not even hiding it well.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 21840
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by Warren » 02 Oct 2017, 00:03

Highway wrote:
01 Oct 2017, 21:01
Mo wrote:
01 Oct 2017, 19:57
Right wingers: We just want people to respect the flag. You can ask for equality and we'd support that
Ravens: Ok, we're going to kneel before the national anthem and pray for equality, unity and justice
RWs: Booooooooooo!
1) Baltimore fans are shitheads. B)the football stadium isn't exactly the place for nuanced thinking. iii)Baltimore fans are shitheads.
Why? Is there a football franchise whose fans aren't shitheads?
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
dead_elvis
Posts: 566
Joined: 01 May 2010, 15:26

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by dead_elvis » 08 Oct 2017, 14:31

Lol, "Sunday Self-Guided Meditation Retreats"

Couldn't happen to a nicer owner. I hope they go 0-16 with an average attendance of a couple thousand.

"Never forget: a war on undocumented immigrants by necessity is a war on all of our freedoms of association and movement."

User avatar
Shem
Posts: 6604
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 00:27

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by Shem » 10 Oct 2017, 13:09

Adrian Peterson asked for a trade so he could get a head start on checking out real estate in Arizona.
"VOTE SHEMOCRACY! You will only have to do it once!" -Loyalty Officer Aresen

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 20995
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by JasonL » 13 Nov 2017, 09:54

What happened to the Bears was so hilariously awful it probably deserves to be canonized as an idiom beyond football.

Bears ball carrier gets to the 2 yard line and lunges the ball toward the pilon. Call on the field is he stepped out of bounds, first and goal on the 2. Bears challenge the play, replay clearly shows he didn't step out of bounds. Alas, replay also shows he lost control of the ball when stretching it out. Fumble out of bounds in the end zone, touch back, other team gets the ball. You win the challenge you made but wind up 100 times worse off for the victory. Like worse than a Pyrrhic Victory because you didn't have to challenge the point in the first place.

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 21840
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Browns give up, pay 16 million for Super Bowl Ring: NFL '17

Post by Warren » 13 Nov 2017, 10:12

JasonL wrote:
13 Nov 2017, 09:54
What happened to the Bears was so hilariously awful it probably deserves to be canonized as an idiom beyond football.

Bears ball carrier gets to the 2 yard line and lunges the ball toward the pilon. Call on the field is he stepped out of bounds, first and goal on the 2. Bears challenge the play, replay clearly shows he didn't step out of bounds. Alas, replay also shows he lost control of the ball when stretching it out. Fumble out of bounds in the end zone, touch back, other team gets the ball. You win the challenge you made but wind up 100 times worse off for the victory. Like worse than a Pyrrhic Victory because you didn't have to challenge the point in the first place.
That sounds more like a Detroit play.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests