ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
But the only votes that count in that regard are the 32 owners he works for. Truth be told at the end of the day while they will pay lip service to the integrity of the game or the safety of it's players or the development of fringe talent, even among the relative purists within that group the bottom line is their bottom line. And if 2 more regular season games and several more opportunities to showcase their product outside the confines will net them another 10-15% revenue stream increase to haggle over...
they'll be down with Goodell. And while fans lament some of the fining and suspensions, that is not only the tradeoff Goodell gets for increasing the bottom line, owners subconsciously perfer someone else play the bad cop and take them directly off the hot seat where discipline is concerned. Because most struggle to do something that impacts their short term prognosis and few trust the rest to do much of anything that will (or the NFLPA to allow them to).
You keep looking at this from a hardcore fans perspective. Understand they don't really worry about what we think because they know by and large they have us by the short hairs. They are looking to expand their casual fanbase...globally. And in the entertainment industry which is what professional sports truly is expanding your audience is the ultimate goal.
Sadly...all true...Of course Goodell is driven by the owners and I think more greed...Or is it?? I think that is the point of Smith's wanting to see the books...is it really greed or the bottom line?? And I think that is a bit different. You are right about lip service and all that..so true. And yes...it is quite true MOST owners do not want to play the bad cop at all...but someone does need to..and although it's taken too far in my opinion...they do want that as they can not police themselves. It is true..I tend to have more of a purist's point of view..and one who has followed the game for decades. BUT..that is my background and you are correct Goodell could not care less about those who have been fans for a long lifetime. They want the casual fan..and that is frankly all they really care about LCD. But I was a big fan of three sports...and I now really am of only one...and I never would have thought that would be the case 30 years ago. and longer....losing interest in baseball slowly...and basketball a bit later. I do not like the changes that have occured in those sports and although I was a hardcore fan...moved on.
Last edited by Pats726; 05-27-2009 at 08:03 PM..
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Actually I am not the one confused...if you had read posts earlier you would have seen how one poster claimed that Kraft WANTED an uncapped year. I know Kraft NEVER said that and my words were correct; he never did say that. I fully understood what Kraft said and do now..
Below is the poster's total post----"Kraft even said it himself that he wants an uncapped year."...There is the quote and I challenged that and you were correct in adding in all of what he said..but nowhere did Kraft say he WANTED that. He speculated IF there was one and had words about that but wanting it?? NO. Just trying to bring clarity.
Maybe we are reading different quotes, Kraft didn't say "if," he said he hopes an uncapped year is the vehicle that gets the owners a deal. Not sure how else you can parse his quote.
Kraft is not a man of empty threats; he doesn't bluff. He would have taken the Pats to CT had the Mass folks not backed off. And he is not only willing to go to an uncapped year, he "hopes it's the vehicle to get us a deal." No ifs, ands or buts.
Quote:
"It's not scary at all to us,'' Patriots owner Robert Kraft said of the possibility of playing without a salary cap next year. "There are a lot of pluses to it. It's definitely not a doomsday scenario, and it might have to happen to get things right. I hope it's the vehicle to get us a deal. I hope it's the ultimate hammer.''
You keep looking at this from a hardcore fans perspective. Understand they don't really worry about what we think because they know by and large they have us by the short hairs. They are looking to expand their casual fanbase.
Just like MNF. They had Dennis Miller and stupid sideline announcers talking about stupid story lines about the players, not the game. Drove (and still drives) hard core fans nuts.
But they don't care, just as you said. We are going to watch the game no matter what. It is the non-fan they are trying to attract, and the non-fan doesn't want to hear a former QB talk about the nuances of reading pass-run by the MLB. BOR-ING. Now a story about how a player from Minnesota owns a restaurant famous for grits, not THAT'S interesting.
Only good thing is the more fans, the more games.
I'm ready for a 20-game season with a DL instead of IR. With more use of the bench like in teh NBA. Strategy of resting your starters in the fourth quarter to keep them fresh for games later in the season.
Goodell just isn't going far enough with his measly 18 games.
Maybe we are reading different quotes, Kraft didn't say "if," he said he hopes an uncapped year is the vehicle that gets the owners a deal. Not sure how else you can parse his quote.
Again..nowhere did Kraft say he wanted an uncapped year...NOWHERE....you even said that as well.....THAT is what you said..so you agree....or do you????
Quote:
Originally Posted by spacecrime
No, he doesn't want an uncapped year, but yes, he sees it as likely necessary for the future health of the league and will do what he feels should be done without hesitation or qualms.
Quote:
"It's not scary at all to us,'' Patriots owner Robert Kraft said of the possibility of playing without a salary cap next year. "There are a lot of pluses to it. It's definitely not a doomsday scenario, and it might have to happen to get things right. I hope it's the vehicle to get us a deal. I hope it's the ultimate hammer.''
Where is the word WANT in that quote??? It MIGHT have to happen to get things right...MIGHT...NOT want...MIGHT have to happen to get it right. IF there is an uncapped year...IF...There is NO want at all in what he said. He is saying IF there is an uncapped year then THAT might be the vehicle to get a deal done. Nowhere does he say he wants it to get to that point. Nowhere....He's saying IF it gets to that point with no deal then the uncapped year IS the ultimate hammer.
Do you not think he would really want a deal before that?? If you REALLY believe that then I do not think you know anything about Kraft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spacecrime
Kraft is not a man of empty threats; he doesn't bluff. He would have taken the Pats to CT had the Mass folks not backed off.
And he is not only willing to go to an uncapped year, he "hopes it's the vehicle to get us a deal." No ifs, ands or buts. Believe what you will, but if you think he will do anything to prevent an uncapped year, you ought to read his statement in full again.
No kidding Kraft was going to Conn..and given what he faced he had really no choice...
The only BUT is you pulled that quote out of context..,BUT that is OK..Believe what you will...
Saying you want an uncapped year and saying IF there is no deal that the uncapped year might be the ultimate hammer to get the deal done are two very different things.
The owners could lock the players out of the 2010 season if they don't want an uncapped year. Also, the Union stated previously that if the cap goes, its never coming back. Which is incentive to NOT have an uncapped year.
If the cap goes, so does the salary floor.
yeah, the Pats, Redskins, Giants, will probably spend $150M+ if theres no cap, but the Bills, Chiefs, Seahawks, etc, will probably end up with $50M payrolls. I'm not sure that losing the cap is good for the union.
yeah, the Pats, Redskins, Giants, will probably spend $150M+ if theres no cap, but the Bills, Chiefs, Seahawks, etc, will probably end up with $50M payrolls. I'm not sure that losing the cap is good for the union.
I think you are correct totally with this. Calling it "uncapped" is not describing it properly and I think the players do not realize that without a cap..there is also no floor, no minimum that teams will have to spend. Thus some teams could spend a lot less..and possibly make a LOT of money.
Also, the Union stated previously that if the cap goes, its never coming back. Which is incentive to NOT have an uncapped year.
Talk is cheap, particularly talk from a union that has a history of caving when push comes to shove. Those words are for the purpose of creating a bargaining position and nothing more, IMO.
Again..nowhere did Kraft say he wanted an uncapped year...NOWHERE....you even said that as well.....THAT is what you said..so you agree....or do you????
Where is the word WANT in that quote??? It MIGHT have to happen to get things right...MIGHT...NOT want...MIGHT have to happen to get it right. IF there is an uncapped year...IF...There is NO want at all in what he said. He is saying IF there is an uncapped year then THAT might be the vehicle to get a deal done. Nowhere does he say he wants it to get to that point. Nowhere....He's saying IF it gets to that point with no deal then the uncapped year IS the ultimate hammer.
Do you not think he would really want a deal before that?? If you REALLY believe that then I do not think you know anything about Kraft.
No kidding Kraft was going to Conn..and given what he faced he had really no choice...
The only BUT is you pulled that quote out of context..,BUT that is OK..Believe what you will...
Saying you want an uncapped year and saying IF there is no deal that the uncapped year might be the ultimate hammer to get the deal done are two very different things.
About as different as the Pats-showing-interest-in-Lenon thread. When you split hairs that finely you can make anything mean anything you want.
We'll know soon enough Kraft's feelings on an uncapped year by what he does or does not do to avoid one or help bring one about.
Actions show what people want more than words, anyway.
The Pats will have near 55 million going into next off-season. How could they not re-sign Wilfork and Mankins? Also, one has to remember that there are other major stipulations that go in for an uncapped year. For instance, The final 4 teams are only allowed to sign their own free agents and then 1 free agent after that for every one they lose. And there is another stipulation for the next 4 teams, but I forget what that is..
Are you saying that the Pats will have 55 million in cap space next season? The reason why I thought an uncapped year would benefit the Pats is because everybody is freaking out that the Pats won't be able to sign Wilfork, Mankins and Seymour if there is a salary cap in 2010. I keep reading speculation from mediots that the Pats will have a hard time keeping their own free agents (which I find to be a load of crap, especially if 2010 is uncapped).
Regarding your second point, I have read about that rule too and I find it extremely stupid and flawed. In fact, what happens if players demand so much money that the bottom or mediocre teams can't afford? They have to sign somewhere. The whole point of being a free agent is being able to sign anywhere you choose. Also, their are always loopholes to the rules in the NFL. For example, you know how the Raiders were always complaining about the Broncos being able to sign anybody they want even when they had little to no salary cap. With that said, playoff teams will find a way to sign the free agents they want. Here's one example I wrote in an earlier post. Say Pierre Woods is the starting OLB this season and he doesn't do very well. The Pats want to upgrade the position so they let him walk in 2010 free agency and replace him with someone like Peppers, Merriman or Ware (highly unlikely).
Last edited by HEY BRO! WHAT UP?; 05-30-2009 at 04:05 PM..
Re: CBA first talk not going well
Linear Mode
