Oh those. Of course I was wrong on that. Never said I wasn't and nobody took me to task on it, at least not that I know of. I was so disgusted with the reactions on the old board to the season that I stopped going on it in October of last year. It was like it became a bunch of Packer fans simply slamming the Bears. If somebody to me to task on it, of course I would have admitted I was wrong on it. But in all honesty, I probably wouldn't make that projection had I known that Hicks was going to go down. The far bigger error on my part was in believing that Floyd would get ten plus sacks.RichH55 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 5:53 pmTurnovers - Really?
People posted all last off season about the Bears Turnover numbers were kind of inauthenically high (i.e. Lucky) - and regardless of the Switch from Vic to Pagano they were likely to fall just based on Luck regression
And you said - that's BS - if anything they should rise - (Note: They, of course, fell)
Admitted I was wrong on Barkley, but I didn't know the extent of his injury either.Glad you can be loud wrong (as per usual) then not even remember But maybe that's better than when you do your Mariotta or Matt Barkley dance where you do remember - you just weren't wrong despite All the evidence being in
(I'm still waiting to here - once - that you were LOUD wrong on Mariotta)
ALL the evidence is FAR from being in with respect to Mariotta.
See, you can't even live up to the conditions of the nonpayment of the bet. Here's Alshon's contract:I could have certainly afforded to pay on Alshon - Do you even care what Truth is? I thought I had lost the Spirit of the Bet though not the Letter of it (See below) and you were gracious in victory
Incidentally when the Eagles won the Super Bowl that year - Alshon reached all his incentives and thus made 13.5+ - you do know that right? It's such a backdoor cover though - that I still lost the spirit of the Bet
The relevant portion is highlighted. The bet itself was specifically limited to the face of the contract. UTBEs were specifically eliminated from it. You lost BOTH the letter and spirit of the bet. But in typical Rich style, you can't even admit you're wrong when it's a condition for nonpayment of a bet. You have to walk it back.2020 Salary Cap Charge: $15,396,500
% of 2020 Team Cap: 6.93%
2020 Cash Payout: $11,500,000
% of 2020 Team Cash Spending: 4.79%
2020 Cash to Cap Ratio: 0.75
Total Contract Value: $52,000,000
Annual Contract Value: 13,000,000
Position Ranking: 16/387 at WR
Fully Guaranteed Money: $14,250,000
You hear this DP. Rich will NEVER admit anything to you on Watson, regardless of what happens, so don't expect it.
My terms are that Mingo will receive at least 30% of defensive snaps as long he doesn't get hurt (missing no more than two games). You might want to think of your end of the terms to avoid "backing into it." I would suggest similar injury contingencies for both Mack and Quinn. Stakes?I'll post more thoughts on Mingo that you can respond too (It's almost like a journeyman on a cheap deal won't get the same respect a Top 10 pick got, but ok)
On the Bet: I'm game - What are the terms
And what is the injury parameters - since you are telling me this is NOT an injury play, right? If Quinn missed half the season and Mingo actually makes the team - Then he could Backdoor his way into that % of snaps - But you'd have been wrong in Spirit
So what are the terms - If you want someone on the Board to hold the money - that's fine too
Incidentally Rich, anytime you want to explain your exemplary math about how the Ravens paid more for Boller than we did for Cutler, feel free. Maybe you could apologize to Trev in the process even though he's not here. I miss him. He was a good guy. Sent me some real good music too, including the Black Keys. Thanks Trev.