The_Admiral Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 I think you're projecting an awful lot of your own lofty beliefs on a league so gauche about gobbling up money that they just had the balls to ask their musical entertainers to pay them to work. And I have a very hard time believing Rush Limbaugh has more money than Donald Trump, though both of their bids seem to be more bluster than anything. To take another angle, we can agree that Jerry Richardson is an odious excuse for a human being, right? The NFL stands by him. They stand behind Jim Irsay's drugs, Danny Snyder's team name, Jerry Jones's underage girl on his crotch, and so much more. They can't be afraid of one billion-dollar boor above all others. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 There's a huge difference between defending the scumbags who are already in the ownership circle and allowing new ones in. And I'm not aware of any current owners who have so openly flirted with racism (or who, perhaps not incidentally, came to the vigorous defense of Donald Sterling). It's true that Trump hasn't been as openly racist as the character Limbaugh plays on the radio, but he's come too close for most leagues to stomach. And FWIW, I think the NFL actually has a pretty good case in getting the Super Bowl performers to pay them for the exposure. There's an argument that they get more visibility from the game than the viewers they can bring to it. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCap Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 We're going to stop the political discussion that doesn't immediately pertain to NFL ownership. It's been interesting because it's been the exact opposite of the naked partisan behaviour we usually see, but it's still going to attract a less productive political element to the conversation, and no one wants that. PotD 26/2/12 1/7/15 2020 BASS Spin the Wheel, Make the Deal Regular Season Champion 2021 BASS NFL Pick'em Regular Season Champion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 And FWIW, I think the NFL actually has a pretty good case in getting the Super Bowl performers to pay them for the exposure. There's an argument that they get more visibility from the game than the viewers they can bring to it. A thousand times no. The NFL isn't breaking new artists here. The finalists for being chosen to pay to perform are Katy Perry, Rihanna, and Coldplay -- about as mainstream and mass-appeal as you can get. They're picking those artists because they can so reliably bring millions of middlebrow viewers. And then the NFL is asking them to pay for the privilege. I hope Rodge at least buys Katy Perry some pizzas and a two-liter of Coke. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 But performing at the Super Bowl is becoming a rite of passage for new artists (as opposed to the reward for entertaining the viewers' parents for the past forty years that it used to be). Katy Perry is a draw, but not on the level of the NFL. If she wants to attract that crossover crowd, or just boost her name recognition among the parents who will buy their kids her music, I've no problem with it. I understand the objection, but out of all the stupid things the league has done in recent years, this one at least has some real sense behind it.(Read you loud and clear, Cap. Thanks.) The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Oh my God, are you seriously suggesting that Katy Perry needs crossover exposure? She's been making #1 records for like six years! And everyone loves her spectacular rack! ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Yes, but think of all those kids who were denied the opportunity to see it on Sesame Street! How else can she reach the television-watching public? Nobody cares about The Simpsons any more, after all.I didn't say that I entirely agreed with the decision, only that I can see the logic. Unlike the NFL's continued response to head trauma, which is just indefensible. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Rihanna would be my pick, for whatever it's worth. Her songs aren't as samey as Katy Perry's, "We Found Love" is an instant classic, and Coldplay isn't really right for the Super Bowl. Who has the Super Bowl this year? If it's CBS, it'll be Coldplay. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 You sure that Coldplay isn't too radical for the regular CBS audience? They sound like a side effect from prescription meds. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illwauk Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 "Do you like Coldplay?""I'm a dull white guy... OF COURSE I like Coldplay!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Well, Coldplay is the heir to U2's larger-than-life art rock, who themselves are kind of an indirect heir to the Who in that respect, who in turn did a CBS halftime once (and sucked). Rihanna or Katy Perry might angry up the blood -- then again, with all the boner pills the NFL sells ad time to, maybe "angry" isn't the right word. Coldplay did turn a corner with Viva la Vida, to be fair. I mean, they still are what they are and ripe for mockery, but at least they're not being actively bad like some of those X&Y songs were. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Ha!The Who's show did suck. That was one CBS should have paid the NFL for, considering it was little more than a medly of all the theme songs for their CSI franchise. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSU151 Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 It's not disingenuous, it's a statement of fact.As I said, I keep re-upping my party membership. Even though that's mostly because New York has closed primaries.Truth be told, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have moved the Democrats so far to the center that they occupy the territory that the GOP used to own. They are Atwater's "big tent" in practice. And my party has, in turn, abandoned the center for the lunatic fringe. But just as I can't drop my Brewers just because they have hideous uniforms, I can't quite find it in my heart to break with the party of my youth.If I call myself a Republican, it's less a statement of attachment to the ugliness that has come to mean, and more that I want to reclaim the label for sanity. The sooner we drive self-serving dog-whistle clowns like Trump out, the better.But enough about me. As for the NFL, they turned down Limbaugh's money. And I'm quite sure he has more than Trump. Given the backlash to their most recent spate of tone-deaf moves, I'd be stunned if they jumped into bed with a Birther.Trump has a net worth that is 10x larger than Limbaugh. Trump's net worth is about $4B.And the RIAA announced Katy Perry is the "most rewarded digital act" (most purchased and downloaded songs) ever. Rihanna is #2. The NFL's idea of giving them much-needed "exposure" is laughable at best , and is a poor decision by the league. Maybe they can retro-actively charge Madonna for the exposure she received. Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Donald Trump is an ill-mannered doofus who talks a big game about doing hard work the right way despite inheriting a great deal of his wealth. Is there a more perfect NFL owner in 2014? ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leopard88 Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 "Do you like Coldplay?""I'm a dull white guy... OF COURSE I like Coldplay!"Hey! Easy now. I'm a 47 year old white guy . . . and I have come to like Coldplay. There, I said it.More surprisingly, my 12 year old son loves Coldplay . . . and it was NOT because he heard me playing their songs. I was too busy trying to brainwash him into liking The Smiths, The Jam, The Cure and assorted 80s alternative/college bands.As for the pay-for-play scam, it is one thing for the NFL not to pay the artists (which has always been the case as I understand it). It is another thing to demand payment for the privilege of playing at the Super Bowl . . . particularly when the Bruno Mars show this year drew better ratings than the (admitted dog of a) game.http://www.kctv5.com/story/26327757/super-bowl-halftime-artist-to-pay-to-playAccording to Nielsen Ratings, 2014’s halftime show featuring Bruno Mars and the Red Hot Chili Peppers drew in just over 115 million viewers - more than thegame itself. Most Liked Content of the Day -- February 15, 2017, August 21, 2017, August 22, 2017 ///// Proud Winner of the CCSLC Post of the Day Award -- April 8, 2008 Originator of the Upside Down Sarcasm Smilie -- November 1, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 LOL. Yes, we know you hate Trump. And he's an who has failed as much as he succeeded. But "in favor of corporate tax breaks, but socially liberal" is hardly radical politics. "Social liberal" might have described Trump a decade ago. Before he decided that he could ride the Tea Party to... more money, I guess. But whether he actually believes in their politics or not, he's very deliberately bathing himself in both racism and radicalism. The NFL won't touch him with a ten-meter cattle prod. And that's your opinion. Strange how it went from a "dabble" to " very deliberately bathing" in a matter of minutes. Hopefully someone other than the Daily Kos agrees. The guy publicly played to the idiotic birther crowd during the 2012 election. When you go that far round the bend, you can't say you're dabbling. EDIT-More on topic, Trump's lost much of his money (insofar as said money was his) before. The now-temporary decline of his empire in the late 1980s and early 1990s is an argument against trusting his money now. On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac the Knife Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 EDIT-More on topic, Trump's lost much of his money (insofar as said money was his) before. The now-temporary decline of his empire in the late 1980s and early 1990s is an argument against trusting his money now.Trump lost any chance he had of becoming an NFL owner when he lost his ass. Mark my words - it will someday be revealed that he's been damned close to broke for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSU151 Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 EDIT-More on topic, Trump's lost much of his money (insofar as said money was his) before. The now-temporary decline of his empire in the late 1980s and early 1990s is an argument against trusting his money now.Trump lost any chance he had of becoming an NFL owner when he lost his ass. Mark my words - it will someday be revealed that he's been damned close to broke for years.Forbes still has him in the list of billionaires for 2014. I don't think he's as broke as you think.His business entities filed corporate bankruptcy four times, but he never filed personal bankruptcy. Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 But a guy who has run his businesses into the ground four times isn't exactly the sort you want to share your wallet with. Even setting aside the whole racist thing. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSU151 Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Yeah but it's damn near impossible to declare bankruptcy as an owner in the NFL. Plus the Bills aren't in Atlantic City. Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.