Jeff-Pash-reacts-to-DeMaurice-Smiths-criticism-of-NFLs-last-offer

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

03-23-2011, 12:34 PM
Lurker64

I think what you're missing JH is that the other major sports want to have a system more like the NFL. Hockey locked their players out for an entire season in order to get a more NFL-like system. Baseball wanted to get a more NFL-like system, which lead to the players strike and the cancellation of a World Series. Basketball is about to lock their players out in order to get a more NFL-like system.

Why would the NFL want to emulate these other, less successful sports, that wish their economic model were more like the NFL's?
03-23-2011, 02:00 PM
Guiness

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustinHarrell

Thanks for seeing hwo it could make sense. I actually think it would make teh league stronger (more money.)

I didn't say it made sense. I said I can see how it would happen :lol:

I'm with most of the others here thinking it's a horrible idea, and as Patler pointed out, the thin edge of the wedge.

I am Canadian. There is very little football in my blood, it runs cold for hockey. The parity of the football is what attracted me. I was heartily disillusioned to watch my favorite NHL team rip a championship winning squad to shreds, and sell the pieces off to the highest bidder. Toronto and New York had coaching and scouting budgets that would cover the entire player payroll of the have-nots. It just wasn't fun to watch (well, except that Toronto never did win the Stanley Cup).

Sometimes when I look at revenue sharing and the cap, I laugh to think how Un-American it is. It's counter to capitalistic thought, probably closer to pure Marxism than anything else I've seen!
03-23-2011, 02:53 PM
Cheesehead Craig

Unless Joe opens up his financials, we're gonna decertify PackerRats.

Then the site will become like the JSO boards which we all want anyways.
03-23-2011, 04:31 PM
swede

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lurker64

Jets traded #17, #52, and random players to Cleveland to move up to #5 to get Mark Sanchez in 1999.

That is a lot to give up for a thirteen-year-old.

(Edit...Smidge beat me to the punch.)
03-23-2011, 04:39 PM
Lurker64

Quote:

Originally Posted by swede

That is a lot to give up for a thirteen-year-old.

(Edit...Smidge beat me to the punch.)

Should have just written "back in '9"... the last digit is the only one that matters!
03-23-2011, 06:03 PM
Pugger

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guiness

I didn't say it made sense. I said I can see how it would happen :lol:

I'm with most of the others here thinking it's a horrible idea, and as Patler pointed out, the thin edge of the wedge.

I am Canadian. There is very little football in my blood, it runs cold for hockey. The parity of the football is what attracted me. I was heartily disillusioned to watch my favorite NHL team rip a championship winning squad to shreds, and sell the pieces off to the highest bidder. Toronto and New York had coaching and scouting budgets that would cover the entire player payroll of the have-nots. It just wasn't fun to watch (well, except that Toronto never did win the Stanley Cup).

Sometimes when I look at revenue sharing and the cap, I laugh to think how Un-American it is. It's counter to capitalistic thought, probably closer to pure Marxism than anything else I've seen!

Isn't this what the Marlins did after they won the world series?

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page