Cookiemonster Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 :worthy: :lol: Now, THAT'S funny! What is so funny about honoring your commitments, I will say it again, you are an example of what is wrong with society in general, you must be part of the me first generation.
thebandit27 Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 No, that doesn't make him wrong, or a bad person, what makes him wrong, is when he decides that he is bigger than therest of the team, and I belive he did just that. As far as violent long-term health threatening injuries, Paaaaalease, again, I have never seen a fatality, we all run the risk of long term injuries as soon as we get out of bed every morning, that assumes, that all of us do get out of bed every morning. About the most that could happen to him, would be maybe a carrer thretening injury, but an overall health threatening injury, let me say it again, Paaaaaalease. His head is too big and fat to suffer a concussion. BTW there certainly are guaranteed contracts, as well as signing bonuses in the NFL. Right, that's why the current players union is in a dog-fight with retired NFL players over benefits and compensation because guys that played the game 20 years ago are half-paralyzed, brain damaged, homeless, etc. Check the facts... http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_6777202
The Dean Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 What is so funny about honoring your commitments, I will say it again, you are an example of what iswrong with society in general, you must be part of the me first generation. NFL teams don't honor their commitments, either. They regularly cut guys who are still under contract (and often owe them nothing). NFL contracts are regularly negotiated with later renegotiation in mind. Hate the system, if you will, but don't pretend it is something that it isn't.
thebandit27 Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 What is so funny about honoring your commitments, I will say it again, you are an example of what iswrong with society in general, you must be part of the me first generation. Yes, don't you see? Those that recognize that, in the NFL, contracts get renegotiated and players position themselves for big paydays are what's wrong with society. Frankly, the fact that The Dean sees this as fact truly represents a me-first attitude. Makes me sick, really. What a joke.
thebandit27 Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 NFL teams don't honor their commitments, either. They regularly cut guys who are still under contract (and often owe them nothing). NFL contracts are regularly negotiated with later renegotiation in mind. Hate the system, if you will, but don't pretend it is something that it isn't. Pretty much the long and short of it. Well said.
Cookiemonster Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 Right, that's why the current players union is in a dog-fight with retired NFL players over benefits and compensation because guys that played the game 20 years ago are half-paralyzed, brain damaged, homeless, etc. Check the facts... http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_6777202 Now you are really delerious, I am fully aware of the movement to compensate players from a by-gone era, where there was no safety net, and they should be taken care of, but that is not what we are talking about here, like I said in an earlier post, these guys are companenated to the point that just a couple of years salary will set them up for life, and they certainly should be able to afford health insurance. Many of the guys from that past era lived hard and fast lives, and did not take care of themselves propoerly, and I would venture to say, that most had way more opportunity given to them, after football then any of us working stiffs would ever recieve. Some, however did suffer lifetime dibilitating injuries, and they should be supported, and then you had many like for example Jefferson Street Joe Gilliam, who chse his lifestyle, and ultimatley paid a steep price for it. You are trying to compare apples to acai berries.
The Senator Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 NFL teams don't honor their commitments, either. They regularly cut guys who are still under contract (and often owe them nothing). NFL contracts are regularly negotiated with later renegotiation in mind. Hate the system, if you will, but don't pretend it is something that it isn't. True, but you skipped over one crucial element - the huge up-front signing bonuses. As you well know, contracts these days are heavily 'front-loaded' - and I've never seen a player return a signing bonus or offer to take a pay-cut for 'underperforming'. (And I think we all know that it's the huge up-front money that Peters lusts for, so he can dog it for the remainder of his career while chowing down on cheesburgers and twinkies. )
The Dean Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 True, but you skipped over one crucial element - the huge up-front signing bonuses. As you well know, contracts these days are heavily 'front-loaded' - and I've never seen a player return a signing bonus or offer to take a pay-cut for 'underperforming'. (And I think we all know that it's the huge up-front money that Peters lusts for, so he can dog it for the remainder of his career while chowing down on cheesburgers and twinkies. ) Again, up front bonuses are part of the current system...which includes contracts signed with renegotiation in mind. Peters contract and bonus were below what even an average LT makes. The Bills made a mistake by not renegotiating Peter's contract when he was moved to, and successful at, the LT position. Peters made a mistake by listening to his agent and missing all of camp and preseason. All can be rectified by signing Peters to a reasonable LT contract, with the ability to make top LT money base on performance. Peters NEVER held out when he was paid at the level of his job, and performance. I don't see him holding out now, based on that one aberration,, when he was not paid at the level of the job he held. All the personal bulls#it is nonsense.
The Senator Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 Again, up front bonuses are part of the current system...which includes contracts signed with renegotiation in mind. Peters contract and bonus were below what even an average LT makes. The Bills made a mistake by not renegotiating Peter's contract when he was moved to, and successful at, the LT position. Peters made a mistake by listening to his agent and missing all of camp and preseason. All can be rectified by signing Peters to a reasonable LT contract, with the ability to make top LT money base on performance. Peters NEVER held out when he was paid at the level of his job, and performance. I don't see him holding out now, based on that one aberration,, when he was not paid at the level of the job he held. All the personal bulls#it is nonsense. Call it a 'gut feeling', but I foresee Peters holding out again and again, becoming a malcontent every time someone signs a contract for more than he makes. Time will tell if I'm wrong.
The Dean Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 Call it a 'gut feeling', but I foresee Peters holding out again and again, becoming a malcontent every time someone signs a contract for more than he makes. Time will tell if I'm wrong. I guess so. The guy has never been a malcontent, and held out only once, with a new agent, when his salary was way below the level of a LT. I see Peters performing as he always has, when he wasn't being screwed, and didn't have a new agent who was without a payday on Peter's contract. I would make the contract as lucrative as possible for performance, and as punitive as possible for missed time, weight, etc. Trust but verify...that sort of thing.
billsfreak Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 Call it a 'gut feeling', but I foresee Peters holding out again and again, becoming a malcontent every time someone signs a contract for more than he makes. Time will tell if I'm wrong. I agree, Once a whiny B word diva always a whiny B word diva! If they gave him what he wanted, within 2 years he would want to redo it again.
Cookiemonster Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 Again, up front bonuses are part of the current system...which includes contracts signed with renegotiation in mind. Peters contract and bonus were below what even an average LT makes. The Bills made a mistake by not renegotiating Peter's contract when he was moved to, and successful at, the LT position. Peters made a mistake by listening to his agent and missing all of camp and preseason. All can be rectified by signing Peters to a reasonable LT contract, with the ability to make top LT money base on performance. Peters NEVER held out when he was paid at the level of his job, and performance. I don't see him holding out now, based on that one aberration,, when he was not paid at the level of the job he held. All the personal bulls#it is nonsense. Will it though? Once a malcontent always a malcontent, T.O. comes to my mind, one minute he is crying "thats my quarterback" on national TV, and the next he is throwing him under the proverbial bus. Peters has shown us his true colors, the Bills have to cut the cancer out.
Cookiemonster Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 I guess so. The guy has never been a malcontent, and held out only once, with a new agent, when his salary was way below the level of a LT. I see Peters performing as he always has, when he wasn't being screwed, and didn't have a new agent who was without a payday on Peter's contract. I would make the contract as lucrative as possible for performance, and as punitive as possible for missed time, weight, etc. Trust but verify...that sort of thing. OK, by your logic, as long as Peters isn't being what he percieves to be "screwed", and has a new more tolerant agent, he will perform, wow great logic, I am glad that the Bills don't have you negotiating deals for them.
thebandit27 Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 Now you are really delerious, I am fully aware of the movement to compensate players from a by-gone era, wherethere was no safety net, and they should be taken care of, but that is not what we are talking about here, like I said in an earlier post, these guys are companenated to the point that just a couple of years salary will set them up for life, and they certainly should be able to afford health insurance. Many of the guys from that past era lived hard and fast lives, and did not take care of themselves propoerly, and I would venture to say, that most had way more opportunity given to them, after football then any of us working stiffs would ever recieve. Some, however did suffer lifetime dibilitating injuries, and they should be supported, and then you had many like for example Jefferson Street Joe Gilliam, who chse his lifestyle, and ultimatley paid a steep price for it. You are trying to compare apples to acai berries. "Delirious" means feverish or elated...I am neither, but we'll move on. You are shifting your argument. What you said is that Peters is not at risk for an injury that could affect him long-term, and I replied by showing you hard evidence that he (and everyone else that plays the game) are indeed at such a risk. Arguing that the guy can afford health insurance is misplaced. Almost makes me feel feverish or elated.
The Dean Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 OK, by your logic, as long as Peters isn't being what he percieves to be "screwed", and has a new more tolerant agent,he will perform, wow great logic, I am glad that the Bills don't have you negotiating deals for them. No perception involved here. Peters simply wasn't being paid what an average (or below average) LT makes, in the NFL. Had he been making average LT money, then you might have a point.
Cookiemonster Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 "Delirious" means feverish or elated...I am neither, but we'll move on. You are shifting your argument. What you said is that Peters is not at risk for an injury that could affect him long-term, and I replied by showing you hard evidence that he (and everyone else that plays the game) are indeed at such a risk. Arguing that the guy can afford health insurance is misplaced. Almost makes me feel feverish or elated. What post were you reading? I didn't say that Peters was not at risk for an injury that could effect him long term, I simply said that we are all subject to long term injuries, granted football players more, but the point that you made was that it could be long term health effecting, I just don't see that, and I belive that his current compensation level is ample to deal with any long term injuries that he may suffer as a result of football. Another words dealing with a bum knee or back, that resulted from an old football injury, or what ever is not the same as dealing with Cancer or some other life threatening illness. The point about being able to afford health insurance is not misplaced, as your are arguing that Peters has to look out for number one, and that he could experience a health changing injury, and then you go on to cite the problems with the older generation of football players, being taken care of for old past chronic injuries, I doubt many of them have adequate health insurance, or it wouldn't be a problem, would it?
Cookiemonster Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 Fair points, but Peters (as every player in the NFL does) has to look out for #1. If he blew out his knee earning less money than Dockery and Kelsey think his family would care that he a lot of so-called "character"? I will never fault a player playing in one of the most brutal sports for trying to get as much money they possibly can. NFl careers could be gone in an instant and not one person on this board who care about Peters as soon as he isn't a Bill. Niether will I, just do it the right way.
stuckincincy Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 What post were you reading? I didn't say that Peters was not at risk for an injury that could effect him long term,I simply said that we are all subject to long term injuries, granted football players more, but the point that you made was that it could be long term health effecting, I just don't see that, and I belive that his current compensation level is ample to deal with any long term injuries that he may suffer as a result of football. Another words dealing with a bum knee or back, that resulted from an old football injury, or what ever is not the same as dealing with Cancer or some other life threatening illness. The point about being able to afford health insurance is not misplaced, as your are arguing that Peters has to look out for number one, and that he could experience a health changing injury, and then you go on to cite the problems with the older generation of football players, being taken care of for old past chronic injuries, I doubt many of them have adequate health insurance, or it wouldn't be a problem, would it? I suspect there are no current NFL players that can't afford health insurance after they leave their highly profitable line of work. The minimum salary structure for 2007 is as follows: * Rookies and first-year players $285,000 * Second-year players $360,000 * Third-year $435,000 * Fourth-year $510,000 * Fifth- through seventh-year $595,000 * Eighth- through tenth-year $720,000 * Eleventh-year and longer $820,000 Even if you only last one year, that's nice part-time jack. After a free college education during which you may have taken slap-silly coursework. And unless you are a total idiot, you plan for a job when you no longer are on a roster. Often, just being a former NFL player gets you hired in sales or some such for a company because of your name - even though you may be a total incompetent at anything and you never bothered to make yourself useful to anybody. Half of these players took up free spots in classrooms that should have been occupied by others who actually wanted an education. I have no sympathy whatsoever for your perceived plight of NFL players . Most anybody could figure out how to leverage a minimum starting salary of 285K into something for the future. Instead of blowing it on bling, a posse, night clubbing, and a Cadillac Escalade...
Cookiemonster Posted January 21, 2009 Posted January 21, 2009 I suspect there are no current NFL players that can't afford health insurance after they leave their highly profitable line of work. The minimum salary structure for 2007 is as follows: * Rookies and first-year players $285,000 * Second-year players $360,000 * Third-year $435,000 * Fourth-year $510,000 * Fifth- through seventh-year $595,000 * Eighth- through tenth-year $720,000 * Eleventh-year and longer $820,000 Even if you only last one year, that's nice part-time jack. After a free college education during which you may have taken slap-silly coursework. And unless you are a total idiot, you plan for a job when you no longer are on a roster. Often, just being a former NFL player gets you hired in sales or some such for a company because of your name - even though you may be a total incompetent at anything and you never bothered to make yourself useful to anybody. Half of these players took up free spots in classrooms that should have been occupied by others who actually wanted an education. I have no sympathy whatsoever for your perceived plight of NFL players . Most anybody could figure out how to leverage a minimum starting salary of 285K into something for the future. Instead of blowing it on bling, a posse, night clubbing, and a Cadillac Escalade... Another one that gets it!
Recommended Posts