NFL Crybabies

and not one word about our special forces who do much tougher work which has much more importance. Why don't some of your socialists recommend taking money from the rich athlete and giving it to the deserving soldier? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Hell lets take money from our rich school teachers for the deserving soldier.

take money from the rich and give to someone else

don't look mow JD, but that's pretty much the definition of socialist ...

and the truth rears its ugly head again ... JD is a socialist !

if it weren't for pro sports just think about how many 7 foot tall, 300 lb sanitation engineers we would have picking up our garbage Originally Posted by CJ7

Such an intelligent comment from a high minded liberal.

Such an intelligent comment from a high minded liberal. Originally Posted by bambino

key words "just think"

that's waaaaaaaaay above your pay grade

Yankee stadium hasn't been filling up so much lately. And I'm suggesting that people walk there, or taxi/subway/bus to pay a reasonable amount a family of four could manage monthly, or maybe even a little less often as per their taste. Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

you're suggesting that families of four should walk through the South Bronx?

Payton is actually a great example; his abilities are built, compared with other top QBs, on time invested in practice and study.If Marino, Favre, or even Jim Kelly had his work ethic, I can imagine them all being multiple Superbowl winners. Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

and not one word about our special forces who do much tougher work which has much more importance. Why don't some of your socialists recommend taking money from the rich athlete and giving it to the deserving soldier? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Of course, I'm entertained by mediocrity, I pay for TW cable and I post in this forum. Facts already in evidence man Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

Now THAT was FUNNY!!!

No offense taken, I'm hoping the silliness is at least in part due to being against the norm.

I am not advancing that Tiger doesn't affect revenue; that would immediately dismiss reason. I identified him as a special talent, because he is the best, he can do things few contemplate, he's got personality, and, sadly, he's black where few have been black before (apologies to Calvin Peete and Jim Thorpe. Interesting, why isn't Beyonce complaining about Tiger still being virtually alone in that regard?). My point is more along the Bull Durham principle that, after the select few, there is but a fraction of a stoke difference that would be further mitigated with time and resources.

Same thing with college vs. the NFL. The athletes aren't as good, but there are hundreds of thousands of them, enough to supply all the NFL and more if they didn't have to study and dedicate time to other things. Why should one guy marginally better get millions while the others sell cars? And why does it have to be the best talent to be entertaining? People still go to Sandler movies and they've sucked for a solid decade.

Finally, the players in the NFL do not risk life and limb to entertain me, or you, they do it to compete and be the best. Had Jerry Jones built his stadium first I might agree (nice building Jerry, what do we do now?); he didn't. The game came, then the money, then the greed. Were there no money there'd still be boys beating the shit out of each other in a field. I don't like the owners either. But the original point was that it is bullshit to ask for more money due to the risk and then use American judicial resources (why we are in the political thread) to sue for more money when that risk becomes real.

Of course I think they should be cared for. But they should be cared for with resources set aside by all parties before the champagne, the limos, the broads and the dapper suits are considered.

And for any football player to claim he didn't know there was risk of serious, debilitating injury would be as unreasonable as me claiming Tiger doesn't increase revenue. Maybe if you go way back there were some mistreated guys, but they hung up their pads long ago.

I'm all for sport, competition must be nourished, but we pay too much for entertainment. Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

Completely correct - when I played the game, I did it solely for my own reasons, not for the people watching. I wanted to pound the other guy into submission, or die trying. I got hurt plenty of times but that is the risk to play a big boys game. As for the special forces, they aren't killing people in my name, so I don't feel responsible for them, either. The whole concept of a nation-state seems to be fading, anyway. Just join the tri-lateral commission and be done with it!

and not one word about our special forces who do much tougher work which has much more importance. Why don't some of your socialists recommend taking money from the rich athlete and giving it to the deserving soldier? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Hell lets take money from our rich school teachers for the deserving soldier. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

take money from the rich and give to someone else

don't look mow JD, but that's pretty much the definition of socialist ...

and the truth rears its ugly head again ... JD is a socialist ! Originally Posted by CJ7

When I think of how things stand, what Payton gets, Goodell, then the fairly mediocre player that gets the league minimum, and compare it to some of the more productive positions in society (I'm hesitant to say teachers as here in Buffalo the teacher's union seems stronger at negotiating than teaching), positions that need doing, which get paid less than 1% of what many sports stars make, I conclude that there might be a few tenets of socialism that might be worth looking into. And really there is nothing less American than attempting to eliminate a way of thought.

I don't know much about the South Bronx, I imagine the subway is safer than walking, but in any case, the higher the cost of the ballgame the more attractive the attendee is as a mark.