CommonCents Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 I guess I don't agree with what you seem to be suggesting is the balance of supply and demand. Of which is there a greater supply: men and women willing to make millions of dollars to play football? Or men and women with enough wealth to secure ownership of a team? Exactly what leverage is it that the players have here? How long has the NFLPA been so weak? I am asking in all seriousness I don't know, I didn't follow the business side of the NFL when I was younger. I don't expect them to go from being manipulated to doing the manipulating but if they get their act together they could unify and slow the owners down. What leverage do they have? That's a broad question and it's a hard one for a fan to answer. To better their terms they would have to remain unified and endure a lockout. As we saw last time though the players will crack before the owners and that tosses "leverage" out the window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaaadThingsMan Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 The NFL's form of guaranteed contracts is the right way IMO, there's former players from the NHL still being paid 4 years after they left the league. That is just stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 People, don't feed the trolls. Anyone here who's defending Brady is just that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 Guaranteed contracts are stupid when players can just act like Mario did last year - not like scheme so not perform. And yet, every other major sports league has them despite the fact players can always mentally check out. Just like every other employee in every other job in the world can. There are plenty of ways to protect the team from this even with guaranteed contracts. Connecting the lack of "guaranteed contracts" to player safety is an interesting contortion. Is there another pro league (in this country) where the owners are NOT interested in their pocketbooks? Do you think the NBA, MLB owners wouldn't each sever a testicle to be able to get rid of fully guaranteed contracts? Would NFL football be better if teams were stuck paying every stupid contract they signed for its full value and term? Tell us why that would be better. Once again you not only miss the point you completely invent a new one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 And yet, every other major sports league has them despite the fact players can always mentally check out. Just like every other employee in every other job in the world can. There are plenty of ways to protect the team from this even with guaranteed contracts. Once again you not only miss the point you completely invent a new one. I think you were pretty clear: "A league that gets by without guaranteed contracts despite printing money hand over fist should tell you everything you need to know about the NFL's priorities. It ain't player safety. It's their pocketbooks" So again, what is it about contracts and player safety? You brought the two topics up and linked them in a single thought....walk me through it. Or answer the other questions perhaps.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punching Bag Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 And yet, every other major sports league has them despite the fact players can always mentally check out. Just like every other employee in every other job in the world can. There are plenty of ways to protect the team from this even with guaranteed contracts. If "I checked out" at work, I'd be fired and I could even be sued; the underlined phrase is not applicable. And if they could not stop it last year with Mario there is no way they can with a guaranteed contract especially with a "partner" who wants to litigate every issue even issues they agree to at bargaining table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 I think you were pretty clear: "A league that gets by without guaranteed contracts despite printing money hand over fist should tell you everything you need to know about the NFL's priorities. It ain't player safety. It's their pocketbooks" So again, what is it about contracts and player safety? I was clear because it's not a complicated point. The NFL not guaranteeing contracts is entirely about player safety in the sense that it's a tacit acknowledgment that their sport destroys their players' health. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 I really don't understand how Brady's defenders can make their case with a straight face. I know it's the american way to never admit that you ever did anything wrong but come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 I really don't understand how Brady's defenders can make their case with a straight face. I know it's the american way to never admit that you ever did anything wrong but come on. They really need to suck it up and understand that it's not about them, Brady, Goodell or even the league. It's about labor law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 And there you go proving my point. Goodell's decisions are not at issue here. It's his authority to issue them. Anyone arguing anything but Goodell's authority is obfuscating the facts this decision was based on. And it's obvious Media Team Brady answers to Krafty Bob's bat signal. Here comes the all-out media pity party for Brady, crying about everything but the facts. It's funny because normally we hear how beholden to the league the media is. Fact is we are through 4 judges and its split 2-2? A few have said from the start this will be a close call that could fall either way. I think that's proven to be true despite the tenor of the thread. It's a messy, and generally poorly handled situation from both sides no matter what the end result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Lightning Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 I've taken the same stance since the beginning of the issue. Nothing odd about it. No tears for a lying repeat cheater who coerces team underlings to do his bidding. Flawed system or not, Brady deserves this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 This was pretty simple. Goodall was protecting the authority given to him by the CBA. The majority of players were probably not that worried about Goodell's authority as they know like I know I'm not going to break the law, but I do care about how much money I can make, and probably were very motivated by the limitations on practices, pads, etc. I'm not spending a bunch of time on the guaranteed contracts thing as I don't know how this was inserted into a Brady suspension upheld. It would really surprise me if Brady keeps going on this one as there is almost no chance of a reversal. Just move on, unless he wants other teams for the suspension than these four. They probably behind closed doors think they can beat the Bills and Dolphins without Brady. The Cardinals in Arizona was going to be really tough to win so they concede. It's just kind of fun listening to these Patriots fans lose their mind. I can't stand those guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Brees takes aim at Goodell after Brady ruling Drew Brees took aim at the disciplinary power of NFL commissioner Roger Goodell on Tuesday when asked for his reaction to the league's Deflategate penalties against Tom Brady being reinstated by a federal appeals court. The New Orleans Saints quarterback said Goodell's ability to serve as "judge, jury and executioner" has been a "black eye" for the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Brees takes aim at Goodell after Brady ruling Maybe FeBrees ought to contact DeMerits Smith and ask him why Goodell has that ability in the first place. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Maybe FeBrees ought to contact DeMerits Smith and ask him why Goodell has that ability in the first place. GO BILLS!!! Because NFL players caved during negotiations. They always cave. I think that this one will get changed with the next CBA, but NFL players will remain the weakest union/association in pro sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That's No Moon Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Because NFL players caved during negotiations. They always cave. I think that this one will get changed with the next CBA, but NFL players will remain the weakest union/association in pro sports. It might, but it's going to cost them something. No way Rog gives that away for anything less than and arm, a leg, the first born son, and jus primae noctis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beef Jerky Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 It might, but it's going to cost them something. No way Rog gives that away for anything less than and arm, a leg, the first born son, and jus primae noctis TBH I think it would be one thing Goodell would want to get rid of. He doesn't seem to like it and all he wants is to make money for his owners in reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 I was simply pointing out that there was precedent for such worry/torture. In other words, it comes from somewhere. This really bothers you? Picking fights--nah. Does swatter fight with the fly? You were doing what you always do -- stating and then defending an inane point just to get a rise out of someone. And yes, it bothers me. It's about time for the ignore feature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 You were doing what you always do -- stating and then defending an inane point just to get a rise out of someone. And yes, it bothers me. It's about time for the ignore feature. You get a point for irony. Brilliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted April 27, 2016 Share Posted April 27, 2016 Week 4: Bills @ NE Garoppolo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts