beast
3 years ago
If there isn't a drop in Cap it's because teams agreed to barrow future cap via the TV deals.

Which a good sign is rumor that the TV deals might be almost agreed on (allegedly).

10-year TV deals could be done “within a month”
Posted by Mike Florio on February 15, 2021, 7:09 AM EST

The NFL is about to cash in, again.

Peter King explains in his latest Football Morning in America column that the NFL is “within a month” of finalizing 10-year TV deals. Those packages “could result in an aggregate increase of 70 to 100 percent increase in rights fees from the last contract.”


Jabari Young of CNBC recently reported that the frameworks for the deals could be finalized before the setting of the 2021 salary cap, a signal that some of the money to be earned in the TV deals could be shifted to pump the spending limit for the coming season above the expected figure of $180 million, which would represent a pandemic-fueled drop of $18.2 million from 2020.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/  wrote:


UserPostedImage
Cheesey
3 years ago

You... you do realize what your (and WPR's) pipe dream is actually runs contrary to free-market enterprise, right? In other words, you realize what you (both) propose doesn't align with the values of capitalism that have made America the land of opportunity and American citizenship desired by so many across the globe, right?

I had to do a double take to make sure "Comrade" wasn't in front of Cheesey.

Originally Posted by: all_about_da_packers 



Do you know that there are limits to what a lawyer can charge in a personal injury case? They are limited to charging one third of the settlement, and can’t charge if they lose the case.
Is that killing the lawyers?
Nope.
So there are limits in other professions, so why not people that are getting paid ridiculous money to play a game?
Football has been around for a hundred years, and survived up to now. And past players didn’t get millions of dollars to play.
I know there are millions of fans that would LOVE to see a game live, but the insane prices to do so make it impossible to afford.
And like I said, it’s just a pipe dream. I don’t expect it to actually happen.
I didn’t know that that would make me a communist. To wish that greed wouldn’t keep the average fan from enjoying seeing a football game live.

I think you took it to the extreme so you could make a dig at me.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
3 years ago

Do you know that there are limits to what a lawyer can charge in a personal injury case? They are limited to charging one third of the settlement, and can’t charge if they lose the case.
Is that killing the lawyers?
Nope.
So there are limits in other professions, so why not people that are getting paid ridiculous money to play a game?
Football has been around for a hundred years, and survived up to now. And past players didn’t get millions of dollars to play.
I know there are millions of fans that would LOVE to see a game live, but the insane prices to do so make it impossible to afford.
And like I said, it’s just a pipe dream. I don’t expect it to actually happen.
I didn’t know that that would make me a communist. To wish that greed wouldn’t keep the average fan from enjoying seeing a football game live.

I think you took it to the extreme so you could make a dig at me.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey 



When people make a perceived "dig" at someone it is because they do not understand how to otherwise express themselves. I wouldn't worry about it.

I also don't think restricting the amount a player can earn helps anything at all. As I outlined in a previous post in hopes that you would focus on the topic at hand instead of the "dig" -- I mentioned several of the pros and cons. What's more important in your mind to discuss? What I outlined on this subject or responding to someone who doesn't otherwise know how to express themselves without taking shots at someone? 🤷‍♂️ The choice is yours.
UserPostedImage
Cheesey
3 years ago

When people make a perceived "dig" at someone it is because they do not understand how to otherwise express themselves. I wouldn't worry about it.

I also don't think restricting the amount a player can earn helps anything at all. As I outlined in a previous post in hopes that you would focus on the topic at hand instead of the "dig" -- I mentioned several of the pros and cons. What's more important in your mind to discuss? What I outlined on this subject or responding to someone who doesn't otherwise know how to express themselves without taking shots at someone? 🤷‍♂️ The choice is yours.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I don’t know.....I have seen times when you have got pissed off when someone makes a “dig” at you.
If someone isn’t adult enough, or allows their dislike of someone to call them terrible names, like calling them a communist, should it just be ignored? Making them THINK they are so smart and correct in what they say? I think they should be called out for it.

Ignoring bad behavior is just as bad as agreeing with it.

🤷‍♂️
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
3 years ago

I don’t know.....I have seen times when you have got pissed off when someone makes a “dig” at you.
If someone isn’t adult enough, or allows their dislike of someone to call them terrible names, like calling them a communist, should it just be ignored? Making them THINK they are so smart and correct in what they say? I think they should be called out for it.

Ignoring bad behavior is just as bad as agreeing with it.

🤷‍♂️

Originally Posted by: Cheesey 



There is a book called the Holy Bible. Check out Matthew 5:39. 😋

Time is one thing none of us can recover or buy. We all should move on instead of worrying about calling someone out. My daughter does this every chance she gets. It makes me not want to talk to her. Who wants to be "called out" because their opinion is different? Why can't people just converse and accept others differences for just that? Why can't we talk the NFL Salary Cap for 2021 without people interpreting something ignorantly worded into a "dig" and then having to completely derail one of the few tangible topics to discuss until draft? It's frustrating that we cannot just stop feeding the asshole-ignorant-dumb-fuck-trolls.
UserPostedImage
Cheesey
3 years ago
The heck with it.
Tomorrow is my twelfth anniversary of my open heart surgery.
I’ve been having chest pain. But there’s no way I’m going through that again.
I’m tired.
UserPostedImage
beast
3 years ago
Actually the NFL is partly great because of their cap limits which gives teams a more equal playing field, unlike other sports, where it's often the same ole teams once again. Which yeah, happens in NFL, but to a lesser degree.

And the Players already have a maximum limit, it's called the salary cap.

And while players are over paid for playing a game, I say owners are especially overpaid for pretending they know a damn thing about football, especially the ones that control the draft and/or FAs.


UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
3 years ago

Actually the NFL is partly great because of their cap limits which gives teams a more equal playing field, unlike other sports, where it's often the same ole teams once again. Which yeah, happens in NFL, but to a lesser degree.

And the Players already have a maximum limit, it's called the salary cap.

And while players are over paid for playing a game, I say owners are especially overpaid for pretending they know a damn thing about football, especially the ones that control the draft and/or FAs.

Originally Posted by: beast 


I think we all are in agreement the NFL Salary Cap for a Team is good. As for the Players having a maximum limit, they really don't because a dumb ass owner/general manager can skew one position with one really bonehead contract. That four year $72 million contract was used as leverage for other QB's. The players receive 48% the NFL revenue. I wonder if the CBA allows the owners to tilt that in favor of the players for 2021 to reduce the salary cap drop off? I think there are some long term issues that will creep up if a dozen teams have to whack a lot of really good players. Hell, maybe that creates more parity though? 🤷‍♂️

All I know -- glad I ain't gotta figure this crap out.

The heck with it.
Tomorrow is my twelfth anniversary of my open heart surgery.
I’ve been having chest pain. But there’s no way I’m going through that again.
I’m tired.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey 


Just know --- if you end up having to go through it again ... you are not alone.


UserPostedImage
Cheesey
3 years ago
Thanks Kevin.
UserPostedImage
all_about_da_packers
3 years ago

Do you know that there are limits to what a lawyer can charge in a personal injury case? They are limited to charging one third of the settlement, and can’t charge if they lose the case.
Is that killing the lawyers?
Nope.
So there are limits in other professions, so why not people that are getting paid ridiculous money to play a game?
Football has been around for a hundred years, and survived up to now. And past players didn’t get millions of dollars to play.
I know there are millions of fans that would LOVE to see a game live, but the insane prices to do so make it impossible to afford.
And like I said, it’s just a pipe dream. I don’t expect it to actually happen.
I didn’t know that that would make me a communist. To wish that greed wouldn’t keep the average fan from enjoying seeing a football game live.

I think you took it to the extreme so you could make a dig at me.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey 



My intention wasn't to take a dig at you, but I did want to challenge a prominent idea that came across in your (and WPR's) post. I'll get to that in a sec; but point taken that I could've phrased the post better to challenge that idea more directly.

Regarding limits on lawyers - it's not something I've ever heard of before. A few clarifications may be needed, because what you talk about regarding an attorney's ability to charge:
1. Attorney's charge fix fee (or percentage) or hourly, but I'm sure you aren't explaining the limits on a lawyer's earning power correctly. For example, a settlement involves no winners or losers - it is a resolution that is founded on compromise. A lawyer can't be limited to not charging for a settlement if they lose because, by definition, there are no losers in settlements. Not to sound like I'm dragging you, because even I still get mixed up navigating the legal system - it is complex. My point is that I've heard of limits for PI lawyers on settlements, but that doesn't limit how such a lawyer can earn from their profession because a PI lawyer's earning/revenue streams can be so diverse (e.g., referral fees for client referrals, fee from being a mediator, being an arbitrator, and (most lucrative of all) fees from taking case to court and arguing in front of a judge). That's even before a PI lawyer that is part of a law firm gets to share in the profits of the law firm they are at (which routinely results in significant bonus payouts). A limit on settlements does not altogether limit how much a lawyer earns from their profession.

2. Lawyers are different than players. You wouldn't hire players to act for your benefit/best interest. You hire lawyers to do only such; lawyers are obligated under rules of their profession to put your interests first, and have a duty to advocate for your best interests (and place your interests above their own in the lawyer-client relationship context). To that end, it can be argued that limits on a lawyer's ability to charge for a particular service they offer you should not be seen as a limit on lawyer's earning ability. Rather, it (i.e., limit of charging 1/3 the settlement figure) is a mechanism to ensure a lawyer is acting within the moral and legal scope of his obligations to you as his/her client - namely, they are not benefiting improperly at your expense. I know for a fact that it is so, so easy for lawyers to bill in a way that you won't see it coming. I've seen cases in the personal injury context where, even before a conference begins between the parties, a lawyer has charged his/her client many thousand dollars before speaking or saying anything. In other words, limits of what lawyers are allowed to charge for settlements from their clients who, usually, are vulnerable (i.e., you usually get a lawyer at one of the toughest/lowest points in your life), not as savvy (i.e., clever in "masking" charges or reading legal bills), and to whom lawyers have legal (and moral) obligations of elevating their interest... I think it is entirely a different context than football players playing for the entertainment of others, to whom they owe no legal (or moral) obligations.

Which brings me back to the idea I wanted to challenge: I'm quite dumbfounded whenever I see people complain/wish football players made less. Why? These are very often football players who're from poor means (whether rural or urban), who've spent the bulk of their lives assuming risk of injury while training/playing for nothing in return until they get to the NFL. All the more power to them for cashing in every penny they can once they get to the NFL. I'm not sure what it is about people in society generally poo-pooing others getting a boatload of green paper after chasing it for so long.

I'm being serious about what I said regarding free markets; no other economic system in recorded history has produced wealth to the rate we're seeing today (which, to be clear, is not to say the system is flawed and can be tweaked to improve). You, I and NFL players only have our labor to sell in exchange for money - we can use it to make products, offer services or provide entertainment for consumption in exchange for making an earning. If an NFL player gets a multi-million dollar contract, all the more power to them; good on them for capitalizing in the way many people only ever dream of. Capping salaries is not going to reduce ticket prices (I note the money the NFL receives from selling its broadcast rights is enough to cover the vast, vast majority of player salaries without ticket/gate revenue).

I'm not sure why NFL players should be held to a standard (i.e., put a limit on how much they earn) when that is not something many of us would support in other scenarios (e.g., CEO salaries, teacher salaries, serving members in the military). I'm all for people chasing their dreams and cashing in (legally) to the most of their ability once they are in a position to do so. If it leads to 9-figure incomes - cool! All the more power to them, as they are receiving a return on their product/service/performance for entertainment that the market has deemed to be a fair exchange/return for what such players are offering. And it's neat seeing so many NFL players who grew up on farms, or lived such tough lives in poor neighborhoods strike it big, and become financial engines for their family, friends, and loved ones - and work to give them (and themselves) a comfortable life.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
Fan Shout
dfosterf (14h) : Maybe
Mucky Tundra (14h) : Yes
Zero2Cool (15h) : No.
Mucky Tundra (18h) : End of a Degu-era
dhazer (18h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
Zero2Cool (21h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
Zero2Cool (22h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (28-Mar) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
52m / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.