Totally disagree Stray. Little Mikey would have sat on his hands just out of spite because that's just the way he is.
Rem
Totally disagree Stray. Little Mikey would have sat on his hands just out of spite because that's just the way he is.
Rem
"For Reds fans, by Reds fans" Learn it, love it, live it.
I know what you're getting at - but other than his dopey "we're not going to lose anymore, rah rah" quotes in the paper, Cast hasn't exactly been super committed to winning.
Cast plays the PR game better than Uncle Carl ever did, but other than that it seems he's running the Reds on pretty much the exact same mindset.
That's important, I agree, but mostly what I care about is results on the field, and both franchises have been lacking.
It'd be nice if Bengals had a "Bengals Fest" (I'd take my sons just like I take them to Reds Fest), a Ring of Honor, etc. but ultimately I just want them competitive most years. Same deal with the Reds. I'm pretty easy to please, I don't need championships, just stay relevant most seasons. Since 2003, that's been the Bengals way more than the Reds.
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
I don't think those giving kudos are arguing that he is. The poker analogy is about winning a nice pot by playing your cards right and, since it is a game of chance, drawing some good cards to win the hand. Poker, when money is on the table, is a game of skill and luck, which is what makes it a fun game. This transaction had both elements.
So, I agree that Mike Brown is not a genius, but he did win this hand with a good sized pot attached. I don't see any need to not give credit when it is due (unless its the Cardinals), although I'm suspicious that this part of the game was played by him. I think all he did was let someone use his chips to stay in the game.
Last edited by traderumor; 10-21-2011 at 04:16 PM.
"Rounding 3rd and heading for home, good night everybody"
Actually, he already got a lot of his money before he played a down. Signing bonuses are the best kind of guarantee because its money in hand before you've been asked to perform. In contract law, that's called consideration, which means once you take that money, you have a duty to perform the contract. The way NFL contracts are actually constructed, the signing bonus should be considered the real compensation and the so-called "salary" is really a performance bonus.
In the real world, if anyone of us signed a contract paying us up front and refused to perform, we would be sued civilly for breach of contract and could also be charged with theft. On top of that, our employer could even prevent us from working for competitors for the length of the contract.
If NFL players wanted more flexibility in deciding when they can leave a team, they could alway just sign one year contracts and renegotiate every year.
Wear gaudy colors, or avoid display. Lay a million eggs or give birth to one. The fittest shall survive, yet the unfit may live. Be like your ancestors or be different. We must repeat!
One difference is that the playing field is far more level in football. It's one thing in baseball when your limited by your market and payroll limitations keep you from consistently competing. It's still frustrating, but I think fans are a little more understanding. In football though, fans see Mike Brown as the cheapest owner in the game not due to market limitations, but his own stubbornness and greed. It's true that the Bengals have been average, but he refuses to invest what is necessary to push them beyond that.
This is only partially true. There is still a dirty little secret that gets very little publicity about money some NFL franchises generate for various reasons that is off-the-books for salary cap purposes, but is still used to lure free agents. The funny part of it is that two orgs., Washington and Dallas, that I know of who have these types of resources are struggling to field a playoff team, while two teams in "small" markets, such as Buffalo and Cincinnati, figure out how to field playoff teams in this environment. The only press this issue got that I've seen was when Brown and Ralph Wilson got out of step with the ownership cartel and started talking about this issue and voted against something a few years ago.
But so many Bengals fans can't let go of the pre-Marvin Bengals that they can't see that this franchise is no more dysfunctional than all but a few NFL orgs.
"Rounding 3rd and heading for home, good night everybody"
In the real world, agents exist to make sure the actual contract language doesn't say what you say it's saying.
Now, you are correct about one thing -- if a player takes a big signing bonus, he owes the team his best effort over a certain time period. Where you're incorrect is the assumption that this time period is the entire nominal length of the contract. No one in the NFL signs "real" nine-year contracts. The only reason deals are ever that long is because the player is doing the team a favor -- giving the club a longer period to pro-rate the signing bonus so it saves them room under the salary cap in the near term. If you're going to lawyer up and try to cut them off at the knees for going along with that, then expect them to stop doing that.
Reading comprehension is not just an ability, it's a choice
3 interceptions for Carson in a little more than a quarter. Ouch.
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |