spindoc Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 What a joke. Amazing that someone can even think that let alone say it to the media like he really thinks it's true. Just because you sent me the link,,,, "You want to see my Adrian Peterson?" One of the funniest things I've ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockPride Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 I love stupid people, they make my day so much better. Hey Adrian, you don't like it? Get a different job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJAlltheWay24 Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Heck, I'm offended and his comments have nothing to do with me. I've been watching Roots lately, got one episode left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
History Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Between Gilbert Gotfriend, the WNBA player whose name I dont remember because it's the WNBA, and now Peterson, people should really make sure the filter between their mouths and brain are functioning properly. Funny thing on her comments is she was one of the players at Rutgers at the time when all of the Don Imus stuff went down and she was very outspoken against him... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodsrider Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 I think the majority of NFL fans are on the players side in the CBA mess. Comments like this will change that quickly. The union needs to get control of their players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvdfc Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindoc Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 I think the majority of NFL fans are on the players side in the CBA mess. Comments like this will change that quickly. The union needs to get control of their players. What union? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Getslow Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 The article says that this interview happened 15 minutes after the union decertified. Everyone was running on some serious emotion at that point. This statement was not a good idea, but I don't think he had much of an idea in his head at all when he said it. I'd actually like to hear him out on the issue, without all the "slavery" stuff. He probably had some interesting stuff to say about the owners wanting a bigger cut of money earned by the work of the players (not to mention the taxpayers who subsidize just about every NFL team through stadium construction and tax incentives). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habib Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 The article says that this interview happened 15 minutes after the union decertified. Everyone was running on some serious emotion at that point. This statement was not a good idea, but I don't think he had much of an idea in his head at all when he said it. I'd actually like to hear him out on the issue, without all the "slavery" stuff. He probably had some interesting stuff to say about the owners wanting a bigger cut of money earned by the work of the players (not to mention the taxpayers who subsidize just about every NFL team through stadium construction and tax incentives). :thumb: His poor word choice detracts from his intentions, I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfback20 Posted March 16, 2011 Author Share Posted March 16, 2011 The article says that this interview happened 15 minutes after the union decertified. Everyone was running on some serious emotion at that point. This statement was not a good idea, but I don't think he had much of an idea in his head at all when he said it. I'd actually like to hear him out on the issue, without all the "slavery" stuff. He probably had some interesting stuff to say about the owners wanting a bigger cut of money earned by the work of the players (not to mention the taxpayers who subsidize just about every NFL team through stadium construction and tax incentives). I realize the owners get a bigger cut of the money, but isn't that how most businesses work? Doesn't a CEO of any company make more than those who are below him on the food chain? Do the players expect to make billions like the owners? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfback20 Posted March 16, 2011 Author Share Posted March 16, 2011 I think the majority of NFL fans are on the players side in the CBA mess. Comments like this will change that quickly. The union needs to get control of their players. I'm not on the players side. To me it appears they had absolutely no intentions of negotiating with the owners. They wanted what they wanted, and they were not budging. While the owners made counter offers and proposals where they gave a little, the players did not. IMO, the players are spoiled. Let them work a 9-5 job for $35K a year and see how upset they are about the money they are making currently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mexitucky Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I'm not on the players side. To me it appears they had absolutely no intentions of negotiating with the owners. They wanted what they wanted, and they were not budging. While the owners made counter offers and proposals where they gave a little, the players did not. IMO, the players are spoiled. Let them work a 9-5 job for $35K a year and see how upset they are about the money they are making currently. I don't agree w/ that. The players get 60% after the owners take the first BILLION in revenue off of the top. The average career is what, 48 games, and that is not the mean, but the average. Owners will be making 1/32 of a billion dollars plus 40% of the revenue pulled in for the length of their ownership. If I'm a player, I try to make as much as I can, and I don't do more work for less pay. I don't care if they make millions, I care about the justice in what the owners are asking. Additionally, the whole reason for this is the claim of financial hardship. However, the owners, to my knowledge, refuse to open their books to prove this claim. If they really wanted this fixed, they would show where the losses in profitability are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PurplePride92 Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 I don't agree w/ that. The players get 60% after the owners take the first BILLION in revenue off of the top. The average career is what, 48 games, and that is not the mean, but the average. Owners will be making 1/32 of a billion dollars plus 40% of the revenue pulled in for the length of their ownership. If I'm a player, I try to make as much as I can, and I don't do more work for less pay. I don't care if they make millions, I care about the justice in what the owners are asking. Additionally, the whole reason for this is the claim of financial hardship. However, the owners, to my knowledge, refuse to open their books to prove this claim. If they really wanted this fixed, they would show where the losses in profitability are. I couldn't agree more. This is a great explanation without mentioning the 4 Billion the owners will receive from Directv because of the lockout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldweatherfan Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 The guys who are playing make plenty of money. I would like to see the retired players taken care of a little better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malachicrunch Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 I think the majority of NFL fans are on the players side in the CBA mess. Comments like this will change that quickly. The union needs to get control of their players. I don't know about a majority, but I'm not sure why anyone would side with the NFLPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts