2009-10 NFL off season thread

[AJM]

The Jets have traded safety Kerry Rhodes to the Arizona Cardinals for a draft pick to be determined later.

Love this pickup...his play was down this past season, but I like it regardless.

[HedleyLamarr]

"Ever see that scene in Scanners when that dude's head blew up?"

I'm having a good time.....not.

[The_Admiral]

"Ever see that scene in Scanners when that dude's head blew up?"

I'm having a good time.....not.

HE BLOWS GOATS.

I HAVE PROOF.

[HedleyLamarr]

You kiss your mother with that mouth?

[BlueSky]

Still trying to figure out what motivated the Bears to give Julius Peppers that kind of money. Here's a guy who's a terror...when he wants to play. And they hand him a guaranteed $40 million? That's a recipe for disaster. As a Saints fan, of course I saw the guy twice a year and can tell you, I never really laid awake nights worrying about how the Saints would contain him.

In the interest of full disclosure, I should admit that anyone being paid tens of millions of dollars to play sports is becoming more and more repulsive to me. Think about any issue a pro athlete has: concussions, career can end on any play, long-term debilitation due to injuries/wear and tear, being tossed aside when your skills erode, and so on. Then think about guys dealing with that when they made so little that most worked regular jobs in the offseason to make ends meet. Sure, they needed to make more money - much more based on what owners are making. But seriously...forty million dollars?

And then there's the stupidity of paying guys big money right out of school when they haven't done jack. Example: based on what should be the basis of every contract - production - it's clear that undrafted free agent Pierre Thomas deserves far more money than Reggie Bush, who's set to make $8 million this season. Ridiculous.

These days, yeah, Jake Delhomme, I can feel the human side and I know money doesn't ease your hurt. But dude, you're walking out the door in Charlotte with twelve million dollars when plenty of athletes have been kicked to the curb with hardly a thank you for their trouble much less that kind of money. So forgive me if I watch your press conference and respond with the immortal words of Jerry Maguire's Rod Tidwell: "Well, boo f***in' hoo."

Rant concluded.

[Seadragon76]

I am loving it hearing about possibly getting Brandon Marshall (Trust me, the 'Hawks need a top flight receiver to help out the stagnant offense), but what scares me is that they might have to give back the 6th pick in the draft for it.

It's a steep price for such a great wideout, but I'd rather give up the 14th pick in the draft knowing that one of the higher rated Offensive Tackles could still be on the board by the time the 6th pick rolls around.

[Cujo]

DE/LB Aaron Kampman leaving Green Bay, signs with the Jags.

[NEW.ERA]

DE/LB Aaron Kampman leaving Green Bay, signs with the Jags.

3-4 Ruined him so at least he'll get a fresh start in a 4-3. That's the one thing I'll fault Dom Capers on was making Aaron Kampman stand up.

But who would have thought Clay Matthews would have the season he had.

[The_Admiral]

Still trying to figure out what motivated the Bears to give Julius Peppers that kind of money.

The Three Stooges know that if they miss the playoffs a fourth straight year, one of the younger McCaskeys is stepping up and firing everyone: Ted Phillips, Jerry Angelo, Lovie Smith, Mike Martz, whoever the hell else is on the staff. They're really desperate. Worst case scenario is that they don't make the playoffs but still go like 9-7 or something and somehow buy themselves one more year of disorganized bumbling and powertripping.

[BBTV]

Still trying to figure out what motivated the Bears to give Julius Peppers that kind of money. Here's a guy who's a terror...when he wants to play. And they hand him a guaranteed $40 million? That's a recipe for disaster. As a Saints fan, of course I saw the guy twice a year and can tell you, I never really laid awake nights worrying about how the Saints would contain him.

In the interest of full disclosure, I should admit that anyone being paid tens of millions of dollars to play sports is becoming more and more repulsive to me. Think about any issue a pro athlete has: concussions, career can end on any play, long-term debilitation due to injuries/wear and tear, being tossed aside when your skills erode, and so on. Then think about guys dealing with that when they made so little that most worked regular jobs in the offseason to make ends meet. Sure, they needed to make more money - much more based on what owners are making. But seriously...forty million dollars?

And then there's the stupidity of paying guys big money right out of school when they haven't done jack. Example: based on what should be the basis of every contract - production - it's clear that undrafted free agent Pierre Thomas deserves far more money than Reggie Bush, who's set to make $8 million this season. Ridiculous.

These days, yeah, Jake Delhomme, I can feel the human side and I know money doesn't ease your hurt. But dude, you're walking out the door in Charlotte with twelve million dollars when plenty of athletes have been kicked to the curb with hardly a thank you for their trouble much less that kind of money. So forgive me if I watch your press conference and respond with the immortal words of Jerry Maguire's Rod Tidwell: "Well, boo f***in' hoo."

Rant concluded.

One argument in favor of paying guys like Bush the big bucks right out of school (it's pretty much the only argument I could come up with) is that a high draft pick usually becomes the center of a team's marketing campaign for the upcoming season. Usually high draft picks are taken by crappy teams who may have trouble selling tickets or moving merch., so when they have an opportunity to sell a million Bush jerseys, and put him on the cover of the ticket brochures, and on every TV commercial, that's worth something. He's generating revenue for them before playing a down, so he deserves a little coin before playing a down.

That being said, yeah - the rookie contracts are pretty ridiculous.

[BaltimoreFan]

Still trying to figure out what motivated the Bears to give Julius Peppers that kind of money. Here's a guy who's a terror...when he wants to play. And they hand him a guaranteed $40 million? That's a recipe for disaster. As a Saints fan, of course I saw the guy twice a year and can tell you, I never really laid awake nights worrying about how the Saints would contain him.

In the interest of full disclosure, I should admit that anyone being paid tens of millions of dollars to play sports is becoming more and more repulsive to me. Think about any issue a pro athlete has: concussions, career can end on any play, long-term debilitation due to injuries/wear and tear, being tossed aside when your skills erode, and so on. Then think about guys dealing with that when they made so little that most worked regular jobs in the offseason to make ends meet. Sure, they needed to make more money - much more based on what owners are making. But seriously...forty million dollars?

And then there's the stupidity of paying guys big money right out of school when they haven't done jack. Example: based on what should be the basis of every contract - production - it's clear that undrafted free agent Pierre Thomas deserves far more money than Reggie Bush, who's set to make $8 million this season. Ridiculous.

These days, yeah, Jake Delhomme, I can feel the human side and I know money doesn't ease your hurt. But dude, you're walking out the door in Charlotte with twelve million dollars when plenty of athletes have been kicked to the curb with hardly a thank you for their trouble much less that kind of money. So forgive me if I watch your press conference and respond with the immortal words of Jerry Maguire's Rod Tidwell: "Well, boo f***in' hoo."

Rant concluded.

One argument in favor of paying guys like Bush the big bucks right out of school (it's pretty much the only argument I could come up with) is that a high draft pick usually becomes the center of a team's marketing campaign for the upcoming season. Usually high draft picks are taken by crappy teams who may have trouble selling tickets or moving merch., so when they have an opportunity to sell a million Bush jerseys, and put him on the cover of the ticket brochures, and on every TV commercial, that's worth something. He's generating revenue for them before playing a down, so he deserves a little coin before playing a down.

That being said, yeah - the rookie contracts are pretty ridiculous.

Teams base their contracts on the future cash flows generated by the players. So that explains the high contracts for rookie players (just like BringBackTheVet said). Reggie Bush was supposed to be the best RB since Barry Sanders, or at least that what was said before the draft. So that would explain the high contact. Yes he hasn't met the expectations, but thats part of the risk you take. Even though he hasn't met the expectations, I'm sure he's given the Saints a pretty nice return. How many people bought tickets and tuned in after Bush was drafted? How many Reggie Bush jerseys do you see around New Orleans and the country? I can't really answer that but I'd imagine alot more Reggie Bush jerseys have been sold than Pierre Thomas. A player's economic value isn't always tied to what they do on the field. The Bears will make a ton of money off Julius Peppers for his name alone. They'll probably profit off him if all he does is step on the field and play to the league average.

I find it funny when sports fans complain about player salaries. Yes it is they are paid a ridiculous amount and there are other jobs that are underpaid in comparison (at least ability-wise). Yet the very sports fans that are complaining are the same people that are responsible for making the sports industry a billion dollar industry. Should the player's get the money they are generating for their teams and leagues?

[Cujo]

While pondering troubled WRs Terrell Owens and Antonio Bryant, the Bengals are now also interested in Brandon Marshall.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4974292

[-(dp)-]

The Lions are reportedly trading for CB Chris Houston of the Falcons. I have heard a 4th rounder and swapping fifths, or a sixth and swapping fifths. The Lions CBs were horrible last year, so he has to be somewhat of an improvement, but what are the thoughts of some of you Falcons fans? I am not really sure what to think of it, but again, it is nice to see the Lions front office actually working at this time of year.

[TFoA]

He's good at defending the run...but I can't lie, he was trbl in pass coverage. He quickly earned a rep for almost never turning his head around in coverage, which frequently got him burned on pass coverage. Basically, watching a pass go up in the air & realizing that it was Chris Houston on coverage caused me to go to prayer. Of course, he's still got time for growth, & hopefully he'll do it in Detroit.

He just became expendable as soon as the Falcons got Dunta Robinson. So yeah, any time that we can get more draft picks, I love it. Great deal for the Falcons, IMO. Could be a steal for the Lions if Houston really works on his pass coverage skills, or just turns his damn head around when he's defending the pass.

[BlueSky]

Still trying to figure out what motivated the Bears to give Julius Peppers that kind of money. Here's a guy who's a terror...when he wants to play. And they hand him a guaranteed $40 million? That's a recipe for disaster. As a Saints fan, of course I saw the guy twice a year and can tell you, I never really laid awake nights worrying about how the Saints would contain him.

In the interest of full disclosure, I should admit that anyone being paid tens of millions of dollars to play sports is becoming more and more repulsive to me. Think about any issue a pro athlete has: concussions, career can end on any play, long-term debilitation due to injuries/wear and tear, being tossed aside when your skills erode, and so on. Then think about guys dealing with that when they made so little that most worked regular jobs in the offseason to make ends meet. Sure, they needed to make more money - much more based on what owners are making. But seriously...forty million dollars?

And then there's the stupidity of paying guys big money right out of school when they haven't done jack. Example: based on what should be the basis of every contract - production - it's clear that undrafted free agent Pierre Thomas deserves far more money than Reggie Bush, who's set to make $8 million this season. Ridiculous.

These days, yeah, Jake Delhomme, I can feel the human side and I know money doesn't ease your hurt. But dude, you're walking out the door in Charlotte with twelve million dollars when plenty of athletes have been kicked to the curb with hardly a thank you for their trouble much less that kind of money. So forgive me if I watch your press conference and respond with the immortal words of Jerry Maguire's Rod Tidwell: "Well, boo f***in' hoo."

Rant concluded.

One argument in favor of paying guys like Bush the big bucks right out of school (it's pretty much the only argument I could come up with) is that a high draft pick usually becomes the center of a team's marketing campaign for the upcoming season. Usually high draft picks are taken by crappy teams who may have trouble selling tickets or moving merch., so when they have an opportunity to sell a million Bush jerseys, and put him on the cover of the ticket brochures, and on every TV commercial, that's worth something. He's generating revenue for them before playing a down, so he deserves a little coin before playing a down.

That being said, yeah - the rookie contracts are pretty ridiculous.

Teams base their contracts on the future cash flows generated by the players. So that explains the high contracts for rookie players (just like BringBackTheVet said). Reggie Bush was supposed to be the best RB since Barry Sanders, or at least that what was said before the draft. So that would explain the high contact. Yes he hasn't met the expectations, but thats part of the risk you take. Even though he hasn't met the expectations, I'm sure he's given the Saints a pretty nice return. How many people bought tickets and tuned in after Bush was drafted? How many Reggie Bush jerseys do you see around New Orleans and the country? I can't really answer that but I'd imagine alot more Reggie Bush jerseys have been sold than Pierre Thomas. A player's economic value isn't always tied to what they do on the field. The Bears will make a ton of money off Julius Peppers for his name alone. They'll probably profit off him if all he does is step on the field and play to the league average.

I find it funny when sports fans complain about player salaries. Yes it is they are paid a ridiculous amount and there are other jobs that are underpaid in comparison (at least ability-wise). Yet the very sports fans that are complaining are the same people that are responsible for making the sports industry a billion dollar industry. Should the player's get the money they are generating for their teams and leagues?

Responding to bolded points:

1. To say the least. Go back and review first round draft selections for any span of time. There will be guys, often the majority of the picks, that you've never heard of. We can take from that the difficulty of predicting pro performance based on college play, and we can also ponder the effect on performance of paying a 21-year-old enough guaranteed money that he could play an uninspired career without bothering to work hard in practice or film study and still have enough money so as to never work again. Bring on the rookie pay scale and let them prove themselves before they're made rich for life.

It's never a good idea to give people rewards they haven't earned. The asshats in Congress who ignited the mortgage meltdown by pushing their "affordable housing" agenda would be smart to learn that. I'm all for affordable housing, but handing out mortgages to people who haven't shown themselves capable of handling their finances isn't the way to do it.

2. A fair point.

3. My complaint is in comparison to guys who endured far worse conditions of employment than the current players, who are divas relative to those who played up through the time when contracts took off. It's also about society in general. As Americans we rail, rightly so, about Muslims who can't see the blatant contradiction of threatening a cartoonist with death for daring to characterize Islam as violent. Yet we tolerate or ignore the same level of hypocrisy right here. Liberals rant over high CEO salaries and corporate bonuses, but the biggest liberals of all, Hollywood stars, often pocket $20 million for one movie. They're worth the money but the executives aren't? Riiiiight... (And btw, my view is that neither is worth that kind of money.)

Look at poor Charlie Sheen, who only brings in over $800,000 per episode for Two and a Half Men. I guess it's easy to be liberal when you're set for life. And yet we idolize these people! So my conclusion is that our values are fouled up.

The Lions are reportedly trading for CB Chris Houston of the Falcons. I have heard a 4th rounder and swapping fifths, or a sixth and swapping fifths. The Lions CBs were horrible last year, so he has to be somewhat of an improvement, but what are the thoughts of some of you Falcons fans? I am not really sure what to think of it, but again, it is nice to see the Lions front office actually working at this time of year.

Heh heh, you said Chris Houston's an upgrade, heh heh. Sorry, man...my impressions in seeing Chris twice yearly is of him chasing Colston, Henderson, and co. into the end zone. The only Falcon DB that comes to mind in the 'making plays' category is Brent Grimes. He's small and he gets toasted now and again too but the guy does make some plays.

[Jigga]

I'm happy to see some good ol' boy liberal bashing (yeeeeeehaaaaaaa) has made its way to the NFL thread and all, but...is nothing sacred?

[BaltimoreFan]

Still trying to figure out what motivated the Bears to give Julius Peppers that kind of money. Here's a guy who's a terror...when he wants to play. And they hand him a guaranteed $40 million? That's a recipe for disaster. As a Saints fan, of course I saw the guy twice a year and can tell you, I never really laid awake nights worrying about how the Saints would contain him.

In the interest of full disclosure, I should admit that anyone being paid tens of millions of dollars to play sports is becoming more and more repulsive to me. Think about any issue a pro athlete has: concussions, career can end on any play, long-term debilitation due to injuries/wear and tear, being tossed aside when your skills erode, and so on. Then think about guys dealing with that when they made so little that most worked regular jobs in the offseason to make ends meet. Sure, they needed to make more money - much more based on what owners are making. But seriously...forty million dollars?

And then there's the stupidity of paying guys big money right out of school when they haven't done jack. Example: based on what should be the basis of every contract - production - it's clear that undrafted free agent Pierre Thomas deserves far more money than Reggie Bush, who's set to make $8 million this season. Ridiculous.

These days, yeah, Jake Delhomme, I can feel the human side and I know money doesn't ease your hurt. But dude, you're walking out the door in Charlotte with twelve million dollars when plenty of athletes have been kicked to the curb with hardly a thank you for their trouble much less that kind of money. So forgive me if I watch your press conference and respond with the immortal words of Jerry Maguire's Rod Tidwell: "Well, boo f***in' hoo."

Rant concluded.

One argument in favor of paying guys like Bush the big bucks right out of school (it's pretty much the only argument I could come up with) is that a high draft pick usually becomes the center of a team's marketing campaign for the upcoming season. Usually high draft picks are taken by crappy teams who may have trouble selling tickets or moving merch., so when they have an opportunity to sell a million Bush jerseys, and put him on the cover of the ticket brochures, and on every TV commercial, that's worth something. He's generating revenue for them before playing a down, so he deserves a little coin before playing a down.

That being said, yeah - the rookie contracts are pretty ridiculous.

Teams base their contracts on the future cash flows generated by the players. So that explains the high contracts for rookie players (just like BringBackTheVet said). Reggie Bush was supposed to be the best RB since Barry Sanders, or at least that what was said before the draft. So that would explain the high contact. Yes he hasn't met the expectations, but thats part of the risk you take. Even though he hasn't met the expectations, I'm sure he's given the Saints a pretty nice return. How many people bought tickets and tuned in after Bush was drafted? How many Reggie Bush jerseys do you see around New Orleans and the country? I can't really answer that but I'd imagine alot more Reggie Bush jerseys have been sold than Pierre Thomas. A player's economic value isn't always tied to what they do on the field. The Bears will make a ton of money off Julius Peppers for his name alone. They'll probably profit off him if all he does is step on the field and play to the league average.

I find it funny when sports fans complain about player salaries. Yes it is they are paid a ridiculous amount and there are other jobs that are underpaid in comparison (at least ability-wise). Yet the very sports fans that are complaining are the same people that are responsible for making the sports industry a billion dollar industry. Should the player's get the money they are generating for their teams and leagues?

Responding to bolded points:

1. To say the least. Go back and review first round draft selections for any span of time. There will be guys, often the majority of the picks, that you've never heard of. We can take from that the difficulty of predicting pro performance based on college play, and we can also ponder the effect on performance of paying a 21-year-old enough guaranteed money that he could play an uninspired career without bothering to work hard in practice or film study and still have enough money so as to never work again. Bring on the rookie pay scale and let them prove themselves before they're made rich for life.

It's never a good idea to give people rewards they haven't earned. The asshats in Congress who ignited the mortgage meltdown by pushing their "affordable housing" agenda would be smart to learn that. I'm all for affordable housing, but handing out mortgages who haven't shown themselves capable of handling their finances isn't the way to do it.

2. A fair point.

3. My complaint is in comparison to guys who endured far worse conditions of employment than the current players, who are divas relative to those who played up through the time when contracts took off. It's also about society in general. As Americans we rail, rightly so, about Muslims who can't see the blatant contradiction of threatening a cartoonist with death for daring to characterize Islam as violent. Yet we tolerate or ignore the same level of hypocrisy right here. Liberals rant over high CEO salaries and corporate bonuses, but the biggest liberals of all, Hollywood stars, often pocket $20 million for one movie. They're worth the money but the executives aren't? Riiiiight... (And btw, my view is that neither is worth that kind of money.)

Look at poor Charlie Sheen, who only brings in over $800,000 per episode for Two and a Half Men. I guess it's easy to be liberal when you're set for life. And yet we idolize these people! So my conclusion is that our values are fouled up.

1. For the most part I agree. I especially hate the amount of leverage high school and college baseball draft picks have. However, you've got to think of it from a business stand point. The players to their teams aren't much different than machinery/equipment for a manufacturing output. You've got the make the investment before performance. Sometimes the investment turn out bad, sometimes really good. But I would say the the majority of the players "earn" or are "worth" their salaries. Teams seem to know what a player will bring. If they didn't we'd see teams folding because they were unable to make a profit due to bad investments.

I'm willing to bet that most draftees have a sense of pride and pressure from teammates not to give up once paid. These are some of the most competitive guys in the world and their going to want to prove their the best. If they fail its from lack of talent or ability to adjust to the next level. I'm sure your a little unhappy with Reggie Bush's transition to the NFL, but I don't think you can blame it on him being uninspired due to his garunteed money.

3. Yes older players were paid significantly less the current players. That was the result of a different era and owner greed. Owners had all the leverage in labor negotiations. They took advantage of this by paying players much less than they were worth. The players essentially had the option of either taking it or stop playing football (the stars had more leverage than league average guys though). Now the players have alot more leverage and contracts are more fair, although players are still "underpaided" because of the salary cap.

There has also been a huge change in the economics of the game. Due to the rise in popularity, rise in tv contracts and jersey sales, as well as inflation todays players are going to generate more income for their teams than past players. Therefore player salaries are going to be higher.

I hate to take this off topic, so I'll only make one comment about the Hollywood stars vs CEOs. Yes, I feel Hollywood stars are very greedy and hypocritical, but I would say the two situations are completely different. Hollywood stars actually "earn" their contracts, while the CEOs don't. The stars are grossing millions in their movies, so like sports players deserve part of that profit. CEOs on the other hand, were giving themselves huge bonuses and taking nice vacations while their companies were crumbling. One group "deserves" the money, while the other doesn't.

Overall, I would say the the NFL is a pretty fair league when it comes to economics. The tickets are significantly underpriced, making it affordable for most people to go to games. Also, the salary cap ensures that players are paid nicely without getting out of hand (without the cap we'd see alot more deals like in baseball).

[BlueSky]

I'm happy to see some good ol' boy liberal bashing (yeeeeeehaaaaaaa) has made its way to the NFL thread and all, but...is nothing sacred?

There's plenty of blame on both sides. Conservatives aren't perfect by any stretch. I consider myself a moderate because the middle of the road is the only place anything gets done. Extremism to either side doesn't work.

I stick by my point that giving people what they haven't earned is a bad idea because I've seen the results firsthand. I'd offer to take it to the Lounge for debate but I suspect neither one of us is going to change our minds one way or the other.

Still trying to figure out what motivated the Bears to give Julius Peppers that kind of money. Here's a guy who's a terror...when he wants to play. And they hand him a guaranteed $40 million? That's a recipe for disaster. As a Saints fan, of course I saw the guy twice a year and can tell you, I never really laid awake nights worrying about how the Saints would contain him.

In the interest of full disclosure, I should admit that anyone being paid tens of millions of dollars to play sports is becoming more and more repulsive to me. Think about any issue a pro athlete has: concussions, career can end on any play, long-term debilitation due to injuries/wear and tear, being tossed aside when your skills erode, and so on. Then think about guys dealing with that when they made so little that most worked regular jobs in the offseason to make ends meet. Sure, they needed to make more money - much more based on what owners are making. But seriously...forty million dollars?

And then there's the stupidity of paying guys big money right out of school when they haven't done jack. Example: based on what should be the basis of every contract - production - it's clear that undrafted free agent Pierre Thomas deserves far more money than Reggie Bush, who's set to make $8 million this season. Ridiculous.

These days, yeah, Jake Delhomme, I can feel the human side and I know money doesn't ease your hurt. But dude, you're walking out the door in Charlotte with twelve million dollars when plenty of athletes have been kicked to the curb with hardly a thank you for their trouble much less that kind of money. So forgive me if I watch your press conference and respond with the immortal words of Jerry Maguire's Rod Tidwell: "Well, boo f***in' hoo."

Rant concluded.

One argument in favor of paying guys like Bush the big bucks right out of school (it's pretty much the only argument I could come up with) is that a high draft pick usually becomes the center of a team's marketing campaign for the upcoming season. Usually high draft picks are taken by crappy teams who may have trouble selling tickets or moving merch., so when they have an opportunity to sell a million Bush jerseys, and put him on the cover of the ticket brochures, and on every TV commercial, that's worth something. He's generating revenue for them before playing a down, so he deserves a little coin before playing a down.

That being said, yeah - the rookie contracts are pretty ridiculous.

Teams base their contracts on the future cash flows generated by the players. So that explains the high contracts for rookie players (just like BringBackTheVet said). Reggie Bush was supposed to be the best RB since Barry Sanders, or at least that what was said before the draft. So that would explain the high contact. Yes he hasn't met the expectations, but thats part of the risk you take. Even though he hasn't met the expectations, I'm sure he's given the Saints a pretty nice return. How many people bought tickets and tuned in after Bush was drafted? How many Reggie Bush jerseys do you see around New Orleans and the country? I can't really answer that but I'd imagine alot more Reggie Bush jerseys have been sold than Pierre Thomas. A player's economic value isn't always tied to what they do on the field. The Bears will make a ton of money off Julius Peppers for his name alone. They'll probably profit off him if all he does is step on the field and play to the league average.

I find it funny when sports fans complain about player salaries. Yes it is they are paid a ridiculous amount and there are other jobs that are underpaid in comparison (at least ability-wise). Yet the very sports fans that are complaining are the same people that are responsible for making the sports industry a billion dollar industry. Should the player's get the money they are generating for their teams and leagues?

Responding to bolded points:

1. To say the least. Go back and review first round draft selections for any span of time. There will be guys, often the majority of the picks, that you've never heard of. We can take from that the difficulty of predicting pro performance based on college play, and we can also ponder the effect on performance of paying a 21-year-old enough guaranteed money that he could play an uninspired career without bothering to work hard in practice or film study and still have enough money so as to never work again. Bring on the rookie pay scale and let them prove themselves before they're made rich for life.

It's never a good idea to give people rewards they haven't earned. The asshats in Congress who ignited the mortgage meltdown by pushing their "affordable housing" agenda would be smart to learn that. I'm all for affordable housing, but handing out mortgages who haven't shown themselves capable of handling their finances isn't the way to do it.

2. A fair point.

3. My complaint is in comparison to guys who endured far worse conditions of employment than the current players, who are divas relative to those who played up through the time when contracts took off. It's also about society in general. As Americans we rail, rightly so, about Muslims who can't see the blatant contradiction of threatening a cartoonist with death for daring to characterize Islam as violent. Yet we tolerate or ignore the same level of hypocrisy right here. Liberals rant over high CEO salaries and corporate bonuses, but the biggest liberals of all, Hollywood stars, often pocket $20 million for one movie. They're worth the money but the executives aren't? Riiiiight... (And btw, my view is that neither is worth that kind of money.)

Look at poor Charlie Sheen, who only brings in over $800,000 per episode for Two and a Half Men. I guess it's easy to be liberal when you're set for life. And yet we idolize these people! So my conclusion is that our values are fouled up.

1. For the most part I agree. I especially hate the amount of leverage high school and college baseball draft picks have. However, you've got to think of it from a business stand point. The players to their teams aren't much different than machinery/equipment for a manufacturing output. You've got the make the investment before performance. Sometimes the investment turn out bad, sometimes really good. But I would say the the majority of the players "earn" or are "worth" their salaries. Teams seem to know what a player will bring. If they didn't we'd see teams folding because they were unable to make a profit due to bad investments.

I'm willing to bet that most draftees have a sense of pride and pressure from teammates not to give up once paid. These are some of the most competitive guys in the world and their going to want to prove their the best. If they fail its from lack of talent or ability to adjust to the next level. I'm sure your a little unhappy with Reggie Bush's transition to the NFL, but I don't think you can blame it on him being uninspired due to his garunteed money.

3. Yes older players were paid significantly less the current players. That was the result of a different era and owner greed. Owners had all the leverage in labor negotiations. They took advantage of this by paying players much less than they were worth. The players essentially had the option of either taking it or stop playing football (the stars had more leverage than league average guys though). Now the players have alot more leverage and contracts are more fair, although players are still "underpaided" because of the salary cap.

There has also been a huge change in the economics of the game. Due to the rise in popularity, rise in tv contracts and jersey sales, as well as inflation todays players are going to generate more income for their teams than past players. Therefore player salaries are going to be higher.

I hate to take this off topic, so I'll only make one comment about the Hollywood stars vs CEOs. Yes, I feel Hollywood stars are very greedy and hypocritical, but I would say the two situations are completely different. Hollywood stars actually "earn" their contracts, while the CEOs don't. The stars are grossing millions in their movies, so like sports players deserve part of that profit. CEOs on the other hand, were giving themselves huge bonuses and taking nice vacations while their companies were crumbling. One group "deserves" the money, while the other doesn't.

Overall, I would say the the NFL is a pretty fair league when it comes to economics. The tickets are significantly underpriced, making it affordable for most people to go to games. Also, the salary cap ensures that players are paid nicely without getting out of hand (without the cap we'd see alot more deals like in baseball).

That's crazy. Not all CEOs are irresponsible or greedy, in fact most are not, or business would not survive in this country. So while I agree that some CEOs meet your description, they're a minority despite how the media and our President portray business.

I'd also agree with your statement on stars with the word "some" inserted there because many if not most are waaaaay overpaid. Come on, dude, twenty million dollars to act in a movie?

With all that said, I apologize for taking this thread where I did. If there's one thing more annoying than "that guy", it's being "that guy." I'll leave the non-sports points for the Lounge from here on.

[BaltimoreFan]

That's crazy. Not all CEOs are irresponsible or greedy, in fact most are not, or business would not survive in this country. So while I agree that some CEOs meet your description, they're a minority despite how the media and our President portray business.

I'd also agree with your statement on stars with the word "some" inserted there because many if not most are waaaaay overpaid. Come on, dude, twenty million dollars to act in a movie?

With all that said, I apologize for taking this thread where I did. If there's one thing more annoying than "that guy", it's being "that guy." I'll leave the non-sports points for the Lounge from here on.

I meant to put some CEOs, the ones I was refering to were the ones I presume the Hollywood stars were complaining about.

I'm not agreeing with the stars. I'm just giving you their point of view (probably the same one most of us would have if we were in their posistion). My feeling on the whole situation is "Yea, you Hollywood guys are right. You've earned that money, but you certainly don't need that much. Especially when so many people are losing their jobs and can't find new ones". Just trying to get a different perspective in there.

I'm also apologize for derailing the thread. These clarifying points are the last I'll make on this subject.

[Harmening]

I'd love to see some kind of rookie cap, too. Let them earn their money and prove what they are worth.

Wonder how many athletes would stay in college for the full four years to get their degree, rather than opt out early. (In case the NFL didn't work out for them)