birdog1960 Posted January 22, 2010 Author Share Posted January 22, 2010 So Ralph offers a guy a 35% raise, the guy doesn't take it, and then goes to one of the wealthest clubs at the time .. because that club's owner broke an agreement that Ralph would not break ... and you blame Ralph for being cheap? Then you believe that this incident is the reason why Scott Norwood misses a FG in the SB, against that same team 25 years later. Makes sense to me. the clip of gogalak on nfl network last night had him stating he was refused a raise, period. Was he actually offered 35%? 35% might not be cheap but no raise to keep a great kicker probably is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 So Ralph offers a guy a 35% raise, the guy doesn't take it, and then goes to one of the wealthest clubs at the time .. because that club's owner broke an agreement that Ralph would not break ... and you blame Ralph for being cheap? Then you believe that this incident is the reason why Scott Norwood misses a FG in the SB, against that same team 25 years later. Makes sense to me. Holy crap! I accused Ralph of being cheap???? Where the !@#$ did you get that???!!! If you checked any of the Ralph-bashing threads currently 'in play', you'd see that I'm one of his most ardent defenders! What I said was 'RW was unprepared for a bidding war', which is true. It hadn't happened until that point, the whole idea of the 'gentlemen's agreement' was to avoid that scenario, and the Giants were offering Gogolak an amount exceeding Ralph's entire $25K AFL franchise entry fee! The whole damned post was meant in jest anyway, ferchrissakes. Like I'm really gonna fly to Westchester County, go into Gate of Heaven Cemetary, and bury some green plastic hot dog at Wellington Mara's grave site! I'm literally floored that anyone would read that post and think I was being serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts