The NFL Thread Part IV: Super Bowl Edition. - Page 23 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Lemonade Stand Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-28-2006, 01:04 PM   #331
Blue Crack Addict
 
phanan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: in the darkness on the edge of town
Posts: 25,060
Local Time: 05:05 PM
Some scores are listed here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderlic_Test

But Bradshaw isn't one of them.

Oh, and Brady's score is higher than a certain QB who is known to implode during the playoffs, but don't tell certain people that...



__________________

__________________
phanan is offline  
Old 02-28-2006, 02:44 PM   #332
Blue Crack Addict
 
Hewson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your own private Idaho
Posts: 26,478
Local Time: 05:05 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by speedracer
Does anybody know if Terry Bradshaw has ever taken the Wonderlic? The results surely would be hilarious.
I think the test started after TB was already in both the NFL and Mensa.
__________________

__________________
Hewson is offline  
Old 02-28-2006, 09:18 PM   #333
ONE
love, blood, life
 
zoney!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: six metro locations
Posts: 11,292
Local Time: 04:05 PM
Don't ask why:

I just had the NFL Network's coverage of the Combine on my television for about 30 minutes.

Is there anything better than watching people do a 40 yard dash?
__________________
zoney! is offline  
Old 03-01-2006, 12:33 AM   #334
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
popacrobat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: this house
Posts: 9,776
Local Time: 05:05 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by zoney!
Don't ask why:

I just had the NFL Network's coverage of the Combine on my television for about 30 minutes.

Is there anything better than watching people do a 40 yard dash?
that was me saturday. i wasn't lying about rich eisen's 40 time.
__________________
popacrobat is offline  
Old 03-01-2006, 06:23 AM   #335
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:05 PM
the nfl is by far the most successful league right now, and they cant agree on a CBA?

idiots.
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 03-01-2006, 06:29 AM   #336
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:05 PM
Around the NFL, disbelief and even desperation
By Len Pasquarelli
ESPN.com

Most fans couldn't care less about the collective bargaining agreement and, justifiable or not, view any discussions of negotiations aimed at extending labor peace through the 2013 season as just another example of the avaricious nature of already overpaid players.

By Thursday, however, when the real-world ramifications of the failed labor talks become more apparent, fans in a lot of NFL precincts will take notice. With negotiations toward an extension having broken off Tuesday afternoon -- despite earlier optimistic reports that the sides were poised to strike an agreement -- salary cap managers from several franchises are readying themselves for what one general manager suggested late Tuesday will come to be known as "Bloody Thursday."

Translation: Because so many teams are up against the projected cap limit of $95 million to $96 million for 2006, and the lack of a CBA extension means there are few options for relief, some big-name players will be jettisoned by Thursday, when teams must be in compliance with the spending limit.


"In past years, you'd see a lot of guys released who maybe still had some name value, but who were really in decline in terms of production," said one AFC team executive who was working late Tuesday, trying to figure out how to pare down a prohibitively bloated cap figure. "This year? People are going to be stunned -- not just by the quantity of players who are cut by Thursday, but by the quality, too. It's going to be ugly. There's going to be blood in the streets and, compared to past years, it's going to be from some bluebloods, guys who can still play."

For a few hours into Tuesday night, after word broke that NFL Players Association executive director Gene Upshaw had departed league offices in Manhattan and headed back to Washington -- after declaring the negotiations hopelessly deadlocked -- there was a sense that the union chief was undertaking one last bit of posturing. As the evening wore on, though, it became increasingly obvious that Upshaw and the league were not just practicing brinksmanship, and that the NFL could instead be poised on the brink of disaster.

The word most often used by teams' staffers, the people charged with crunching the salary cap numbers, and who clearly had bought into the notion that a CBA extension would be struck: stunned.

Said one cap manager: "For months, my owner told me to develop two strategies, one with [an extension] and one without. But nobody, even with all the gloom-and-doom talk of the last few weeks, ever really believed we'd be breaking out 'Plan B.' And then, these last few days, even my owner was telling me he thought it would get done. Unless there's some kind of miracle on Wednesday, our team is going to have to do some drastic things, and I know we're not the only team in that situation."

How drastic? There continue to be rumors the Washington Redskins, who extended numerous contracts in the past to deal with previous cap crunches, could have to play with 20 rookies on the roster in 2006. On Tuesday night in Atlanta, there were rumblings the Falcons, who aren't in nearly the dire straits some other franchises are, might be forced to release tailback Warrick Dunn, who rushed for a career best 1,416 yards in 2005. The Kansas City Chiefs could part ways with perennial Pro Bowl guard Will Shields if he doesn't agree to adjust his contract and reduce a $6.67 million cap charge. And that is just the start of the many examples of potential attrition cited by team officials Tuesday evening.

Certainly the positive vibes of Monday had spiraled into disbelief -- and in some instances, desperation, it seems -- by Tuesday night.

Less than 24 hours earlier, key owners such as Dallas' Jerry Jones and Pittsburgh's Dan Rooney, and high-ranking club officials like New England vice chairman Jonathan Kraft, had offered public optimism about a CBA extension. But in the five-hour bargaining session in New York, things went bad, and by Wednesday's 4 p.m. deadline for reaching an accord that now seems unreachable, they could be far worse.

The league was represented Tuesday by commissioner Paul Tagliabue, vice president of labor relations Harold Henderson, members of the Management Council, and team presidents John Shaw of St. Louis and Atlanta's Rich McKay. In addition to Upshaw, it's believed the NFLPA representatives included attorneys Richard Berthelsen and Jeffrey Kessler.

"We're deadlocked," Upshaw said after the session. "There's nowhere to go."

The two sides remain about 4 percent apart in negotiations. A league source confirmed that the NFL is offering 56.2 percent of revenues, while the NFLPA is seeking a 60-percent share of the pie. The difference translates into approximately $300 million to $350 million per year. In a statement released Tuesday night, the NFL accused the NFLPA of "overreaching." And, rather predictably, the union, which has remained firm in its conviction that the old revenue-sharing models have become obsolete, charged that the optimism of Monday, that a deal would be completed, had been fabricated by the league in an attempt to pressure the NFLPA into a deal.

After essentially claiming the sides had run out of time, and that the league would play the 2007 season as a so-called "uncapped" year, Upshaw did leave some wiggle room by acknowledging that one phone call could change things. But it's not likely that call will be made. ESPN.com has confirmed that a meeting of the powerful Management Council executive committee, made up of eight owners and high-ranking club officials, is still set for Wednesday. But the session is not scheduled to begin until late afternoon, and, with a 4 p.m. deadline looming, it doesn't appear a last-minute accord is possible.

Tagliabue will convene a Thursday meeting of all owners. By that point, though, the mechanisms for an "uncapped" season in 2007 will already be in place. And Upshaw has reiterated throughout the talks that, if the NFL ever plays without a salary cap for one season, players will never permit one to be reinstituted.

There also exists the possibility that players could be locked out before the 2008 season, by which point the current collective bargaining agreement will have expired.

"We're going to behead the golden goose," one NFC owner said last week. "And I can't see why both sides would ever let it get to that. Then again, a year ago, I would have told you we'd never, ever let it get this close to happening. I figured there were enough 'poison pills' [in the CBA], things that negatively impacted both sides, to force an extension. But, hey, here we are. A lot of things in our league could be changed forever."

The lack of an extension, indeed, means a lot for both sides. And not just the composition of rosters.

For instance, players will now need six accrued seasons, not four, to qualify for unrestricted free agent status. So a standout young player such as Chicago Bears three-year veteran linebacker Lance Briggs, who is coming off a Pro Bowl season and whose contract expires after the 2006 season, would have to wait two additional seasons before being unrestricted. The league would also, in an uncapped year, quit funding 401(k) plans (it currently matches player investments on a 2-1 basis) and most other fringe benefits, meaning players would be responsible for those things.

And there would be difficulties, even for the most innovative teams and creative player agents, in meeting financial expectations on most contracts. Players in free agency and high-round draft picks will have trouble approximating the fat deals of the past, and player agents face problems in trying to explain why expectations might have to be lowered.

As of Tuesday, there were a dozen teams in the league with more than $10 million apiece in 2006 salary cap room. It seems logical that those teams, which include four franchises with more than $20 million each in cap space, would benefit from the problems of cap-strapped clubs, especially if the free agent rolls are swelled Thursday with the anticipated cap casualties. But because of the quirks of the pending "uncapped" year in 2007, even those teams will have to move with great caution in crafting contracts.

One player agent suggested that it will be a "nuclear winter" at the outset of free agency, with few teams jumping out and completing early deals because of the uncharted landscape in which the NFL will be operating.

Some other lesser known implications: Without an extension to the CBA, teams will be able to amortize signing bonuses over just four seasons, instead of the maximum seven years. Because of the 30-percent rule, which essentially stipulates that a player's basic compensation (his base salary plus the prorated share of his signing bonus for 2006) cannot be increased by more than 30 percent, teams can't make up the difference in smaller signing bonus with fatter base salaries.

But perhaps the biggest problem is that so-called "not likely to be earned incentives" (NLTBE) will count immediately against the cap. In normal circumstances, NLTBE incentives count on the following year's spending limit. So NLTBEs earned in 2005, for instance, count against a team's 2006 cap. But with an uncapped year looming in 2007, such incentives and bonuses that are triggered in 2006 would immediately apply.

Indeed, barring a dramatic and unanticipated turn of events Wednesday, it is not going to be business as usual around the league. And if the ramifications are as catastrophic as predictions indicated Tuesday they might be, fans could be forced to pay more than the usual grudging attention to business matters.

Len Pasquarelli is a senior NFL writer for ESPN.com.
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 03-01-2006, 08:41 AM   #337
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,381
Local Time: 05:05 PM
it sounds to me that the owners are looking to squeeze even more out of the players, in a league that is already heavily tipped in the owners favor, money wise.

i'm torn on this. the salary cap has made the league incredibly balanced while at the same time dragging the overall level of play down. gone are the days of the true great team, replaced with the great franchise, the great GM, the great "capologist."

even the patriots, the best, most well run franchise of the cap-era, aren't really a true great team... i'm not sure how well the patriots "dynasty" would stack up against the cowboys of the early 90s or the 49ers of the 80s. which i guess makes the patriots run that more impressive, that they've been able to maintain a high level of success without the advantages of those teams of the 80s and early 90s, who could keep everyone as long as they could afford it...

i dunno... i know the cap is good for the league, but part of me would like to see those old juggernaut teams return.

but then again, the colts had all the talent in the world last year and still couldn't get it done because peyton "quarterback/offensive coordinator/head coach" manning is a pussy.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 03-01-2006, 09:07 AM   #338
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:05 PM
I dont want football to become like baseball, where realistically, at most, about 10 teams have a shot to win the World Series.

The other 20 teams are basically just playing out the season.

In the NFL, any year, any team can make a run for the Superbowl, and I think that's best for the fans.
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 03-01-2006, 09:43 AM   #339
Blue Crack Addict
 
Hewson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your own private Idaho
Posts: 26,478
Local Time: 05:05 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Chizip

In the NFL, any year, any team can make a run for the Superbowl.
There are a lot of people in Arizona who disagree with that statement.
__________________
Hewson is offline  
Old 03-01-2006, 09:45 AM   #340
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:05 PM
touchee
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 03-01-2006, 10:09 AM   #341
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,381
Local Time: 05:05 PM
every team has a chance, but then mediocre teams like the pittsburgh steelers and seattle seahawks make it to the super bowl.

it's good in that your team always has a chance, but those years that your team isn't in it, it would be nice to actually see good teams play.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 03-01-2006, 10:17 AM   #342
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:05 PM
i'd rather see star players spread out throughout the league rather than just a few teams hoarding them all

mlb is uncapped yet the astros and white sox made it to the world series last year and i dont think one would consider either of them them as a dynasty type juggernaut team

you cant always have these dynasties, thats what makes them so special
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 03-01-2006, 10:35 AM   #343
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,381
Local Time: 05:05 PM
i don't need a dynasty. i'd settle for two teams that don't suck.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 03-01-2006, 10:40 AM   #344
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 05:05 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Headache in a Suitcase
i don't need a dynasty. i'd settle for two teams that don't suck.
id rather see decent play among all 30 teams rather than great play among 3 or 4 teams and the rest of the teams crappy
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 03-01-2006, 11:30 AM   #345
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,381
Local Time: 05:05 PM
14 teams... 44% of the entire NFL... had 10 or more loses last season.

oh yea... the play is spectacular.
__________________

__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com