Delete This Account

There are incentive clauses worked into contracts that go beyond base salary. You seem to be against the players making what they're valued on in what is relatively a free market. Owners are making money. Fans are still attending and, most importantly, watching. And the networks can't seem to pay enough for the broadcast rights. So of course, you want the actual performer to be the one who gets the short end of the stick. (Excuse me, are you on the NCAA executive committee by chance?) Here's a better question, perhaps. Why are NFL contracts the only ones in pro sports that aren't entirely guaranteed? Is that fair? A case can be made one way or the other. But of course, you decide to go after the players on this one, asking them to risk everything with no certain guarantees. You seem to think many of these athletes have had it easy to get to where they are to make a living. They haven't. What is it, 90 percent of football players never make it out of college (I could be wrong on my numbers, so pardon me), and very few of them actually make it past their third season. But you're absolutely right, why should they be making all this money. They should be working for peanuts. Or, better still, making $25,000 a season like Gordie Howe did during much of the prime of his career. That's right, $25,000, while playing for an owner who at one point controlled two of the NHL six franchises. Was that fair, I dare to ask. Terrible, take. shrug. jw

yeah, there's this one poster, who started a thread about the media vs. Josh Allen, and he really went over the deep end. he even went on and acknowledged he was reacting like "some of the other posters on here that have no life." then, he went on and on and on about "too many hostile people who don't have a life," or something to that effect. man, that guy was really something. please, please, don't be that guy. jw

some people like snark. some don't. i'll mark you down as "a don't." jw

i've been snarky since i joined this board many moons ago. i am snarky to those whom i have little time for, given the things they've posted. i've engaged plenty with people in "actual dialog." in fact, i'm doing so now. which is it? i don't think you're giving a "shout out to sports writer." also never said i was all that important. in fact, i've often noted the opposite, given that my wife is a teacher. and yet, you're the one that keeps mentioning me and my colleagues. actually, it's credibility. we get readers because we have established that one thing in our career. otherwise, i don't give two craps whether you like me. jw

what in god's name are you blabbering on about. you refer to one outlet and then accuse all media of some conspiracy. who's repeating what? i've referred to Allen's practices in two of my stories. and they were in the middle of the stories, not on top. i reported what i saw. i'm not even sure why i'm responding to this in the first place. sorry about the long post. jw waitasecond, you're actually asking us to read the article in question, which the original poster failed to link. c'mon. doing means people have to make up their own minds in regards to the OP's take, rather than taking the OP as being perfectly accurate in his misguided rant. spoilsport. jw and this is my true complaint about how the some of the time "the media" gets a bad name. someone goes off with his own agenda by accusing the media of having an agenda. and rather than people making up their own mind, they simply believe what they heard/saw/read last. be better, folks.

I'm going off two practices in which I've watched him. He corrected some of his throws. So he improved. Not entirely sure what you're going on about. jw dunno. don't care. my comments stand. jw

i know people want to really, really Bill-ieve, but let's tap the brakes here. a team source says something really positive about the team's new young quarterback hope. it's June 1, people. just saying. he's still working with the 3s and did show a few signs of improvement in yesterday's 2-minute drill, though he gets a knock for telegraphing an interception. all that said, a team source saying something you'd expect a team source to say is not actually considered a breath-taking revelation. let's give things a few months. jw

you used to have Dominions jw

It was on Whaley for failing to represent the franchise, and being poorly prepped, knowing what he was in store for. It didn’t help that he was leaking stuff to his friends while at the same time thoroughly avoiding the local media. His tight-lipped responses were an embarrassment all around. His desire to say as little as possible failed him and eventually shed full light on his many deficiencies. He had a future in Buffalo before that press conference. And his fate was sealed the moment he stepped off the podium. It was, as we put it in the business, a total sh&t show. jw

Nope. It was a TBN decision. jw

This is correct. Something like $10.3 million limited to this year's cap. Nothing carries over, as I've been informed. jw

Well. Things changed. How's that for finding it out it wasn't going to happen, before finding out it actually was. jw My apologies on the confusion, but just going on what I was told at 1:30 and then again after 4.

unlikely this will happen tomorrow (Friday), though Bills do want to gain the additional cap space sooner than later. jw

But they are. Yet another baseless guess. Do some of you folks get anything right? jw

Now this thread is finally getting interesting. ? jw

what are you, nuts. i'm not going to share with you what i know based on personal conversations i've had that will remain personal. you make some baseless claim. are called out for it. and now it's on me to provide proof. how about you provide proof that these nda's actually exist. you're wrong. deal with it. jw

you’ve dug yourself a mighty fine hole there. so why not keep digging. ? jw

and you would be wrong jw

But I never read that post. I included the one I was referencing, because it was focused on Promo’s reply to it. And no worries, i’m not going anywhere. jw 1. I’m usually snarky. 2. Don’t tell me how I feel because you are clueless. 3. pffft jw

And for those questioning my reading abilities, here is the post i’m referring to. at what point does the poster use the words “dumb luck.” but, sure, i can’t read. i was wrong. blah, blah, blah. jw

because some people are fooled by mistruths repeated over and over again that finally seem believable. Others don’t like reading inconvenient truths. And then there are those who for some reason are suspicious of science and facts. Which one are you?

With you? nah jw

Not the same punching out replies here on my phone. But you’re right, feel a little off my game. No. I’m having my kicks. I would not waste any ounce of my emotions on you. jw

Oh, they’ll read. Just like how just about everybody here read and/or pored over most of Jerry’s columns, because just about each one had a thread dedicated to it. jw

I can act however I like. It’s still a free country, unless that’s also endangered. jw But you just told me that I had no right to act like a dick. Which is it? jw