Flecther Cox gets paid

[mcnabb7542]

It could be worse, Jerry could have hired Chip.

Oh that would have been spectacular!

 

[chf]

call it whatever sport.
my first sentence to your reply..."absolutely no problem with the percentage"

let me slow it down for ya.
I give a rats ass if the cap explodes and 25 guys makes 10 plus mil. I think the product is lacking in depth through training and advocated for expanded rosters and more game day participates.

yep...you said a whole lot about nothing. Perhaps you'll have more input to the point next time. Chin Up.

So show me a real world example of how that would work. Because i've seen real world examples of where teams have overpaid for ONE or TWO stars, and put themselves in a temporary bind... (see, Haynesworth, Albert), but I've never seen anything remotely like you posit above.

The salary cap saves teams from their own stupidity. That's its function. Some simple math, some projection against the cap rising, and someone who can walk and chew gum at the same time can make sure the team has enough money to pay rookies and special teamers. Instead, most teams have guys who they identify as their 'capologist,' who knows the structure inside and out.

If teams are going to expand rosters, or hell even change the rules on how guys can be kept on the practice squad, then the league will COLLECTIVELY BARGAIN how that will work. That's how it works.

To again, use a real world example, when the CFL dropped 2 pre-season games, and expanded their season to 18 regular season games, then the player's association demanded that there be additional monies (and roster spots) be made available. The two sides hammered that out, and viola - 18 games.

So here's a challenge for ya. Drop the passive aggressive, YUR SO STUPIDZ nonsense, and explain to me why the cap going up is going to hamstring teams from figuring out how to pay the back end of their rosters. Or why extra money floating around would be a detriment to collective bargaining, or why the Player's Association wouldn't want a piece of it by agreeing to add extra bodies.

So far all I've seen from you is vague assertions that the sky is falling. What I'm asking you chicken little, is why we should believe you?

 

[chf]

I could live with that. No guarantees they'd win. They'd just be overpaid. And just as prone to injury as before.

Yeah the 9ers and Cowboys from the pre-salary cap era had trouble winning.

 

[jarntt]

Oh that would have been spectacular!

Yes, but Luckily Jerry is smarter than Lurie

 

[mcnabb7542]

Yes, but Luckily Jerry is smarter than Lurie

We both know that would be the stupidest fight on the SportsHoopla for both of us to engage so let's just drink...

 

[jarntt]

We both know that would be the stupidest fight on the SportsHoopla for both of us to engage so let's just drink...

The good news is that Snyder is dumber than both of them

 

[mcnabb7542]

The good news is that Snyder is dumber than both of them

Oh brilliant save!

 

[Hank Kingsley]

Yeah the 9ers and Cowboys from the pre-salary cap era had trouble winning.

You still need the right combination of players.

And there are no guarantees.

 

[mall3013]

Yes, but Luckily stephen is smarter than Lurie

 

[Broncos6482]

Great. I'll bet Elway wishes he'd given Von that $58 million guaranteed now.

 

[chf]

You still need the right combination of players.

And there are no guarantees.

Where did I say that a non salary cap Seahawks would win the Lombardi every year?

The Yankees don't win the championship every year, but I think it's fair to say that the playing field is less even in a non salary cap world.

You dream about it, because you think the Cowboys would benefit from it. All I'm saying is that there's some other players out there.

The other reason that a cap is good, is that it makes teams like GB much more viable.

 

[Broncos6482]

Where did I say that a non salary cap Seahawks would win the Lombardi every year?

The Yankees don't win the championship every year, but I think it's fair to say that the playing field is less even in a non salary cap world.

You dream about it, because you think the Cowboys would benefit from it. All I'm saying is that there's some other players out there.

The other reason that a cap is good, is that it makes teams like GB much more viable.

I never understood why some people think the cap is so awful. Everyone has an even playing field, that's a lot better than baseball where some teams like the Yankees and Dodgers can spend over $200 million, and other teams spend a quarter of that or less.

 

[Fountain City Blues]

I never understood why some people think the cap is so awful. Everyone has an even playing field, that's a lot better than baseball where some teams like the Yankees and Dodgers can spend over $200 million, and other teams spend a quarter of that or less.

If nothing else, it's better for fans.

 

[cdumler7]

I never understood why some people think the cap is so awful. Everyone has an even playing field, that's a lot better than baseball where some teams like the Yankees and Dodgers can spend over $200 million, and other teams spend a quarter of that or less.

Agree completely. Fans truly can have hope from one year to the next. Now some rebuilds take longer than others but in baseball we are talking some teams never standing a chance because even if they do build up their roster the stars go elsewhere for bigger money eventually. At best the cheaper teams can hope for is that by trading away their top players they can get some cost controlled talent that emerges for a maybe 2-3 year window for the organization before they once again disappear.

 

[tducey]

He's a good player but come on he's not worth that much.

 

[PDay8810]

So show me a real world example of how that would work. Because i've seen real world examples of where teams have overpaid for ONE or TWO stars, and put themselves in a temporary bind... (see, Haynesworth, Albert), but I've never seen anything remotely like you posit above.

The salary cap saves teams from their own stupidity. That's its function. Some simple math, some projection against the cap rising, and someone who can walk and chew gum at the same time can make sure the team has enough money to pay rookies and special teamers. Instead, most teams have guys who they identify as their 'capologist,' who knows the structure inside and out.

If teams are going to expand rosters, or hell even change the rules on how guys can be kept on the practice squad, then the league will COLLECTIVELY BARGAIN how that will work. That's how it works.

To again, use a real world example, when the CFL dropped 2 pre-season games, and expanded their season to 18 regular season games, then the player's association demanded that there be additional monies (and roster spots) be made available. The two sides hammered that out, and viola - 18 games.

So here's a challenge for ya. Drop the passive aggressive, YUR SO STUPIDZ nonsense, and explain to me why the cap going up is going to hamstring teams from figuring out how to pay the back end of their rosters. Or why extra money floating around would be a detriment to collective bargaining, or why the Player's Association wouldn't want a piece of it by agreeing to add extra bodies.

So far all I've seen from you is vague assertions that the sky is falling. What I'm asking you chicken little, is why we should believe you?

LOL....read it slowly, sport (your word)
"Who are you to tell them how to do it?"

and you spin to me being the passive aggressive one here? funny
lol....shit talker pointing a finger.


not a word about percentages this time?

Collective bargaining between the players association and the owners should kinda be understood if talking about roster expansion.

 

[jarntt]

Where did I say that a non salary cap Seahawks would win the Lombardi every year?

The Yankees don't win the championship every year, but I think it's fair to say that the playing field is less even in a non salary cap world.

You dream about it, because you think the Cowboys would benefit from it. All I'm saying is that there's some other players out there.

The other reason that a cap is good, is that it makes teams like GB much more viable.

Where did someone say you did???

I do think the Cowboys would definitely be one of the teams benefiting from it because I think Jerry would be like a kid in a candy store. But, I like the cap in general even if I disagree with aspects of it

 

[chf]

LOL....read it slowly, sport (your word)
"Who are you to tell them how to do it?"

and you spin to me being the passive aggressive one here? funny
lol....shit talker pointing a finger.


not a word about percentages this time?

Collective bargaining between the players association and the owners should kinda be understood if talking about roster expansion.

Ahhh. Okay, I get it now. Yeah, tone can be tough in places like this.

Actually, I wasn't being a-holish with the 'who are you?' line. Wasn't meant to be taken insultingly. But my bad, I can see how you read it that way. Let me restate. Why shouldn't we give the benefit of the doubt that the teams can handle their cap business?

So you can either take that as truth, or double down again, (and speak slower, so my obviously tiny brain can follow the wisdom you're putting down)

See now there's passive aggressive!

 

[chf]

Where did someone say you did???

Hank with this line.

And there are no guarantees.

Of course there aren't. So as I agreed, the Yankees don't win the World Series every year.

I do think the Cowboys would definitely be one of the teams benefiting from it because I think Jerry would be like a kid in a candy store. But, I like the cap in general even if I disagree with aspects of it

We're not disagreeing. I was pointing out the bold. I used Seattle, because of Allen's money, and Hanks hatred of them. There would be others. To be honest, the teams that draft well that could then not have to worry about losing their stars would benefit the most. So Seattle and NE would be high on the list. Hank would love that, because he of course cheers for the Pats too.

Dallas could be a power player too, sure. So long as Jerry gets overruled mostly still.

 

[Hank Kingsley]

Where did I say that a non salary cap Seahawks would win the Lombardi every year?

The Yankees don't win the championship every year, but I think it's fair to say that the playing field is less even in a non salary cap world.

You dream about it, because you think the Cowboys would benefit from it. All I'm saying is that there's some other players out there.

The other reason that a cap is good, is that it makes teams like GB much more viable.

I don't dream about it because I think the Cowboys would benefit from it.

I simply hate the cap. I hate it in hockey too.

Kill the cap. Slit it's throat. Drink it's blood.......