Cliff Stein is back to work

For all things Chicago Bears

Moderator: wab

The Cooler King
Head Coach
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm

Bearfacts wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 12:28 pm
The Cooler King wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 8:49 am
There's definitely subtleties missed since we don't do it for a living. For instance the biggest thing I cant a speak on is how actual negotiations go and impact things.

But here has been one of my biggest changes.

There are 3 teams who's head personnel person (GM/equivalent) comes from a primarily cap/contract background
1. Saints
2. Eagles
3. Bills

Watching those teams closely tells you a lot without the GM needing to speak on it. Actions louder than words and all that. Every other team has a primarily "football guy" at top. That's a not insignificant difference. Most the teams who try the NOL/PHI trickery don't do it as well - discount brand imitators.

My second biggest change was understanding that the purpose of the cap is to ensure the revenue split for players. It's all about $, and the rules are in many ways (though not all, there's weird legacy vestiges) set up to reflect that. But you also have to read a lot of CBA text to pick up on that.
You brought up one thing previously that's very much in line with something I would like to explore and that would also be on my list of things to discuss with Cliff Stein and that is; how does cash flow enter into the picture and more specifically how are various bonuses structured and paid out. Some types are more obvious than others. We believe we know this but do we?

Although I haven't taken the time to research it one thing that's popped up from time to time is a requirement for a team to escrow guaranteed monies. Is this universal or selective? What triggers it and what are the rules surrounding this. The answers could well be contained in the CBA but as you've pointed out and many of us know CAP vs CASH is not the same thing.

Some insight into actual negotiations would also help. Slotting rookie contracts has all but done away with holdouts but as we've seen before some language in the contract itself can be negotiable. How flexible are teams as far as doing this. With vested vets it's a much different deal. Now the GM/Capologist are dealing with a negotiated fair market value for the specific player.

I'd love to know what the team uses to determine their offer vs how the player agent lays out his position. What happens when the two sides are far apart in this. How does the team decide on how much of a contract they'll guarantee and for what reasons. How important is structure to both sides. Be great to spend a day just learning about the details from both sides of a negotiation.

It's just one of those "crack open a beer" and be prepared to listen and learn kind of deals.
Based on inside*ish* cap people I follow the escrow thing definitely plays a big impact on a team by team basis. Two well known "signing bonus only guarantee" teams are relatively cash poor Bengals and Packers.
Fka "BillGeorge61" @CBFans.net
The Cooler King
Head Coach
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm

Bearfacts wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 1:03 pm
The Cooler King wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 8:15 pm
I mean this is all exactly opposite to how the smartest cap guys in the league function the cap.

Given equivalent guarantees/money, the front loaded cap deal just rolls over less, so it's all moot in the end. Even in the trade hypothetical... You can just eat that cap hit at any time and also, end up right back where you started.

Backload cap hits, and where permissible from load money for favorable time value returns and lower totals.
Let's look at it from this perspective though and how back loading or a restructuring that back loads cap costs can work against you at times.

Assuming the team signing a vet in his prime expects to get his best performance while that player is still in his prime what happens when a significant portion of the deal is back loaded either initially or via restructure and the players performance begins to decline or the player struggles with injuries missing games due to those injuries?

I'd liken this to a car loan in which the payments ascend over time to the point where you still have a significant balance to pay long after the warranty has expired and repair costs are now rising. This does happen and more frequently now that many vehicles are leased in order to keep monthly payments down. You end up upside down.

Either you pay off the balance of lease or a dealership finds a way to role that into a new deal on a new car. Since there's no way to role the remaining deferred cap hit into another players deal an NFL team either takes that full hit upon that players release or trade or splits it into two cap hits, one current one deferred a year.

One example of this is Danny Trevathan. Almost immediately after having been given an extension his play declined and his injuries increased. Other's whose contracts called for ever increasing cap costs were released or traded including Kyle Fuller only to create the cap room needed to sign Andy Dalton who proved to be another wasted effort.

In a more perfect world wouldn't it make more sense at least theoretically to have the majority of a veteran players costs come while he's performing at the top of his game and then decline as he ages and his play falls off due to age or injury? Would keeping a guy like Hicks be more likely if his costs declined from $12 mil to say half that or less?

I know that's not how it works. I'm just throwing out something that would seem to make more logical sense in term of how deals are structured with a cap profile more similar to a bell curve. Low first year cost to enable adding talent now, pay for that talent when performance is in line with expectations, then lower costs as performance declines.

I can't imagine we'll ever see a structure like that within a contract yet it's pretty much what happens to many vets isn't it. For example guys like Hicks and Goldman are still unsigned now and if signed will surely be getting offers for far less than there prior deals paid them. Back loaded deals are pretty common yet they can be very limiting when the bill comes due.
I mean two main things with the car loan analogy I would say.

1. An overwhelming issue with a backloaded car loan is the accrual interest. NFL Cap borrowing is somewhere between zero and negative borrowing rates. Big advantage to cap.
2. People ending upside down on a car lease comes down to buying something they can't afford. So I'd go back to the $. If I was a wealthy buyer with cash in hand for a Cadillac, but the dealer offers me a zero to negative rate interest lease, I'd probably take it too. But my ability to afford it isn't being disguised by a low payment with accrued interest and big bill.

So the whole frontloading thing ends up being mostly an anesthetic based on analogies to fundamentally different financial instruments.
Fka "BillGeorge61" @CBFans.net
User avatar
Bearfacts
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 771
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado

The Cooler King wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 2:09 pm
Bearfacts wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 12:28 pm

You brought up one thing previously that's very much in line with something I would like to explore and that would also be on my list of things to discuss with Cliff Stein and that is; how does cash flow enter into the picture and more specifically how are various bonuses structured and paid out. Some types are more obvious than others. We believe we know this but do we?

Although I haven't taken the time to research it one thing that's popped up from time to time is a requirement for a team to escrow guaranteed monies. Is this universal or selective? What triggers it and what are the rules surrounding this. The answers could well be contained in the CBA but as you've pointed out and many of us know CAP vs CASH is not the same thing.

Some insight into actual negotiations would also help. Slotting rookie contracts has all but done away with holdouts but as we've seen before some language in the contract itself can be negotiable. How flexible are teams as far as doing this. With vested vets it's a much different deal. Now the GM/Capologist are dealing with a negotiated fair market value for the specific player.

I'd love to know what the team uses to determine their offer vs how the player agent lays out his position. What happens when the two sides are far apart in this. How does the team decide on how much of a contract they'll guarantee and for what reasons. How important is structure to both sides. Be great to spend a day just learning about the details from both sides of a negotiation.

It's just one of those "crack open a beer" and be prepared to listen and learn kind of deals.
Based on inside*ish* cap people I follow the escrow thing definitely plays a big impact on a team by team basis. Two well known "signing bonus only guarantee" teams are relatively cash poor Bengals and Packers.
I can't for the life on me imagine the Packer Corporation being cash poor. Not after you've seen what I've seen.
User avatar
AZ_Bearfan
MVP
Posts: 1240
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 6:49 pm
Location: Mesa, AZ

Image
Last edited by AZ_Bearfan on Sat May 07, 2022 4:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Bearfacts
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 771
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado

The Cooler King wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 2:13 pm
Bearfacts wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 1:03 pm

Let's look at it from this perspective though and how back loading or a restructuring that back loads cap costs can work against you at times.

Assuming the team signing a vet in his prime expects to get his best performance while that player is still in his prime what happens when a significant portion of the deal is back loaded either initially or via restructure and the players performance begins to decline or the player struggles with injuries missing games due to those injuries?

I'd liken this to a car loan in which the payments ascend over time to the point where you still have a significant balance to pay long after the warranty has expired and repair costs are now rising. This does happen and more frequently now that many vehicles are leased in order to keep monthly payments down. You end up upside down.

Either you pay off the balance of lease or a dealership finds a way to role that into a new deal on a new car. Since there's no way to role the remaining deferred cap hit into another players deal an NFL team either takes that full hit upon that players release or trade or splits it into two cap hits, one current one deferred a year.

One example of this is Danny Trevathan. Almost immediately after having been given an extension his play declined and his injuries increased. Other's whose contracts called for ever increasing cap costs were released or traded including Kyle Fuller only to create the cap room needed to sign Andy Dalton who proved to be another wasted effort.

In a more perfect world wouldn't it make more sense at least theoretically to have the majority of a veteran players costs come while he's performing at the top of his game and then decline as he ages and his play falls off due to age or injury? Would keeping a guy like Hicks be more likely if his costs declined from $12 mil to say half that or less?

I know that's not how it works. I'm just throwing out something that would seem to make more logical sense in term of how deals are structured with a cap profile more similar to a bell curve. Low first year cost to enable adding talent now, pay for that talent when performance is in line with expectations, then lower costs as performance declines.

I can't imagine we'll ever see a structure like that within a contract yet it's pretty much what happens to many vets isn't it. For example guys like Hicks and Goldman are still unsigned now and if signed will surely be getting offers for far less than there prior deals paid them. Back loaded deals are pretty common yet they can be very limiting when the bill comes due.
I mean two main things with the car loan analogy I would say.

1. An overwhelming issue with a backloaded car loan is the accrual interest. NFL Cap borrowing is somewhere between zero and negative borrowing rates. Big advantage to cap.
2. People ending upside down on a car lease comes down to buying something they can't afford. So I'd go back to the $. If I was a wealthy buyer with cash in hand for a Cadillac, but the dealer offers me a zero to negative rate interest lease, I'd probably take it too. But my ability to afford it isn't being disguised by a low payment with accrued interest and big bill.

So the whole frontloading thing ends up being mostly an anesthetic based on analogies to fundamentally different financial instruments.
True, but the impact is much the same. With a negative amortization loan you end up with a balance yet to pay off just as you do with dead cap if it's part of a players guaranteed money or the unamortized balance of a signing bonus. Interest on the money is a side issue since a loan/lease may also have low or zero interest but still have an unamortized balance in say 36 or 48 months.

For example. Around 2002 I leased a new Saab 95. Because I was a previous Saab owner among other spiffs I got a 60 month lease with almost zero lease cost. Less than 1%. Virtually every dollar I paid was a direct reduction of the initial cap cost of that lease. In 60 months the market value of the car and it's residual lease value should have been about the same. However, at 36 months I would have been seriously upside down had I decided to trade the car in on a new one or sell it and pay off the lease.

I love using OPM. I've bought thousands of dollars worth of musical gear by taking advantage of zero interest rate financing but the purchase amount still needs to be paid off over time. If I end up selling something for less than I owe I have to make up the difference just as an NFL GM does if he releases or trades a player with dead cap still on the books. The only difference is they have to pay off that dead cap balance now whereas I can just keep making my payments on my purchase and eat the loss.


Maybe just maybe NFL GMs also end up upside down due to signing players they can't afford too just like consumers. ;)
User avatar
Bearfacts
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 771
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado

AZ_Bearfan wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 3:28 pm Image
:rofl: ...... :toast:
User avatar
AZ_Bearfan
MVP
Posts: 1240
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 6:49 pm
Location: Mesa, AZ

So glad to have him back in his natural role. Something about being an agent in his past really seems to help. My dream is when he gets promoted to Philips position, they bring in somebody like Trace Armstrong to replace Cliff.
Image
The Cooler King
Head Coach
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm

Bearfacts wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 3:45 pm
The Cooler King wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 2:13 pm
I mean two main things with the car loan analogy I would say.

1. An overwhelming issue with a backloaded car loan is the accrual interest. NFL Cap borrowing is somewhere between zero and negative borrowing rates. Big advantage to cap.
2. People ending upside down on a car lease comes down to buying something they can't afford. So I'd go back to the $. If I was a wealthy buyer with cash in hand for a Cadillac, but the dealer offers me a zero to negative rate interest lease, I'd probably take it too. But my ability to afford it isn't being disguised by a low payment with accrued interest and big bill.

So the whole frontloading thing ends up being mostly an anesthetic based on analogies to fundamentally different financial instruments.
True, but the impact is much the same. With a negative amortization loan you end up with a balance yet to pay off just as you do with dead cap if it's part of a players guaranteed money or the unamortized balance of a signing bonus. Interest on the money is a side issue since a loan/lease may also have low or zero interest but still have an unamortized balance in say 36 or 48 months.

For example. Around 2002 I leased a new Saab 95. Because I was a previous Saab owner among other spiffs I got a 60 month lease with almost zero lease cost. Less than 1%. Virtually every dollar I paid was a direct reduction of the initial cap cost of that lease. In 60 months the market value of the car and it's residual lease value should have been about the same. However, at 36 months I would have been seriously upside down had I decided to trade the car in on a new one or sell it and pay off the lease.

I love using OPM. I've bought thousands of dollars worth of musical gear by taking advantage of zero interest rate financing but the purchase amount still needs to be paid off over time. If I end up selling something for less than I owe I have to make up the difference just as an NFL GM does if he releases or trades a player with dead cap still on the books. The only difference is they have to pay off that dead cap balance now whereas I can just keep making my payments on my purchase and eat the loss.


Maybe just maybe NFL GMs also end up upside down due to signing players they can't afford too just like consumers. ;)
I mean the ability to stop payments is the advantage to the NFL teams though. Not sure I'm following your point.

The alternate use case being presumed isn't "I bought a better asset at a better price". It's "I accounted for more of my purchase up front".
Fka "BillGeorge61" @CBFans.net
User avatar
Bearfacts
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 771
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado

The Cooler King wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 9:04 pm
Bearfacts wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 3:45 pm

True, but the impact is much the same. With a negative amortization loan you end up with a balance yet to pay off just as you do with dead cap if it's part of a players guaranteed money or the unamortized balance of a signing bonus. Interest on the money is a side issue since a loan/lease may also have low or zero interest but still have an unamortized balance in say 36 or 48 months.

For example. Around 2002 I leased a new Saab 95. Because I was a previous Saab owner among other spiffs I got a 60 month lease with almost zero lease cost. Less than 1%. Virtually every dollar I paid was a direct reduction of the initial cap cost of that lease. In 60 months the market value of the car and it's residual lease value should have been about the same. However, at 36 months I would have been seriously upside down had I decided to trade the car in on a new one or sell it and pay off the lease.

I love using OPM. I've bought thousands of dollars worth of musical gear by taking advantage of zero interest rate financing but the purchase amount still needs to be paid off over time. If I end up selling something for less than I owe I have to make up the difference just as an NFL GM does if he releases or trades a player with dead cap still on the books. The only difference is they have to pay off that dead cap balance now whereas I can just keep making my payments on my purchase and eat the loss.


Maybe just maybe NFL GMs also end up upside down due to signing players they can't afford too just like consumers. ;)
I mean the ability to stop payments is the advantage to the NFL teams though. Not sure I'm following your point.

The alternate use case being presumed isn't "I bought a better asset at a better price". It's "I accounted for more of my purchase up front".
We seem to be defining this much differently. Either that or it's late and I'm still half asleep.

The GM can eliminate a need to pay non-guaranteed future salary but he can't eliminate the cap accounting for what's been paid and has been deferred for cap purposes or what must contractually be paid under any guarantees that contract contains.

In NFL terms that's what dead cap is right? It's a non-cash balance to be accounted for regarding amounts already paid.

I can eliminate future payments on a purchase or a lease but if the balance owed is greater than whatever amount I receive when that item is sold I'm still obligated to pay off the balance. I can't discount it simply because I sold it for less than that.

Maybe mine is just a bad example or I'm not communicating my thinking well enough.


Not at all getting what you mean by the second paragraph though. Maybe I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue. :rofl:

Don't knock it when it helps provide mental clarity......LOL.
The Cooler King
Head Coach
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm

Take the following lease term (or player contract as it were)

8,000 year 1 payment, 5,500 in years 2-5 each.

In cap terms I could structure this as :

7,000 signing bonus, 1,000 base Y1 and 5,500 base in Y2-5. This is a back loaded cap deal
= 2.4, 6.9, 6.9, 6. 9, 6.9

Or I I wanted frontload, no SB and
= 8, 5.5, 5.5, 5.5, 5.5

If my lease allowed me to walk away from the final 2 years, my net terms still end up as 3/19. The frontload didn't "do" anything even though that final year deadhit of 2.8 is compared to no dead hit at the end. I just shifted time timing though. Still worked out to 3/19, spread over 4 cap years. This would still be the same story if I also restructured each of my 5.5 payments and bumped out 9M in new bonus prorations. I didn't increase the asset outlay, just the timing.
Fka "BillGeorge61" @CBFans.net
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5639
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am

This reminds me cash basis vs accrual accounting. I hated it and insisted on cash basis, it was just more logical to me.
User avatar
Yogi da Bear
MVP
Posts: 1377
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:43 pm

All I've gotten from all this is that somehow football players have become cars. Here we see who I think is Kurt Cousins:

Image

:D
User avatar
Bearfacts
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 771
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado

dplank wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 12:23 pm This reminds me cash basis vs accrual accounting. I hated it and insisted on cash basis, it was just more logical to me.
Maybe that's why I think the way I do except Rich called me illogical so now I'm really confused. :surrender:

RichH55
Head Coach
Posts: 3099
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm

Bearfacts wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 7:42 pm
dplank wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 12:23 pm This reminds me cash basis vs accrual accounting. I hated it and insisted on cash basis, it was just more logical to me.
Maybe that's why I think the way I do except Rich called me illogical so now I'm really confused. :surrender:

Go to overthecap rather than Orlovsky's football reference page.

It will help
User avatar
Bearfacts
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 771
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado

RichH55 wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 8:47 pm
Bearfacts wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 7:42 pm

Maybe that's why I think the way I do except Rich called me illogical so now I'm really confused. :surrender:

Go to overthecap rather than Orlovsky's football reference page.

It will help
Why? Illogical me requires explanations to more cryptic posts.

Logical me wants you to tell me what I'm supposed to be looking for and find there.
RichH55
Head Coach
Posts: 3099
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm

For some reason you think Orlovsky's NFL Career is pertinent to other discussions about him.

They are not.

I understand you'd rather not admit the error. But it was a logical error nonetheless
User avatar
southdakbearfan
Head Coach
Posts: 3453
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:23 pm
Location: South Dakota

The Cooler King just prefers to throw gasoline on a fire.
User avatar
Bearfacts
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 771
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado

RichH55 wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 9:58 pm For some reason you think Orlovsky's NFL Career is pertinent to other discussions about him.

They are not.

I understand you'd rather not admit the error. But it was a logical error nonetheless
Rich, you're not such a bad guy but you do have a bad habit of thinking for others and assuming yours is the only correct way to view something. Your opinions are your own and not necessarily shared by others. You're always free to express them but don't keep pushing an issue that I've already taken time to explain to you what my opinion was based on. If it's not logical to you maybe you've been twisting logic for so long up is down and left is right. I dunno but it's not my job to correct it.

That said I really don't much give a rat's ass about what YOU understand. I understand myself very well and I owe you absolutely nothing. No admission of an error or a fault in any way. My thoughts and opinions are my own and they don't need to conform with yours. In fact most of them probably won't and that OK with me too.

But to avoid even more friction let's do this. You stay on your side of the tracks, I'll stay on mine, and never mistake me for someone you can keep fucking around with.....OK?
The Cooler King
Head Coach
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm

southdakbearfan wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 12:23 am The Cooler King just prefers to throw gasoline on a fire.
Never.

And I don't know what that even is supposed to mean in this context.
Fka "BillGeorge61" @CBFans.net
User avatar
UOK
Site Admin
Posts: 23241
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 11:07 am
Location: Champaign, IL

Why is Orlovsky in yet another thread? Please stop.
"None of us are in the board room, locker room, or on the sideline, so in a way, we don't know shit."
- Otis Day
User avatar
UOK
Site Admin
Posts: 23241
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 11:07 am
Location: Champaign, IL

Bearfacts wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 1:58 am You stay on your side of the tracks, I'll stay on mine, and never mistake me for someone you can keep fucking around with.....OK?
Knock it the fuck off. This kind of rhetoric will not fly around here. "Internet Tough Guy" stuff is begging for arguments and locked threads to occur, as well as potential suspensions.

Everybody calm down, and find some other hills to die on that don't involve this message board.
"None of us are in the board room, locker room, or on the sideline, so in a way, we don't know shit."
- Otis Day
User avatar
Ditka’s dictaphone
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2021 12:33 pm

The Cooler King wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 8:44 am
southdakbearfan wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 12:23 am The Cooler King just prefers to throw gasoline on a fire.
Never.

And I don't know what that even is supposed to mean in this context.
Seems unlikely from a “Cooler King”
User avatar
The Marshall Plan
Head Coach
Posts: 4136
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:47 am
Location: Parts Unknown

RichH55 wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 9:58 pm For some reason you think Orlovsky's NFL Career is pertinent to other discussions about him.

They are not.

I understand you'd rather not admit the error. But it was a logical error nonetheless
Orlovsky gives an opinion about something.

The GOAT Tom Brady gives an opinion about the same thing.

Which one do you trust more?
Image Image
The Cooler King
Head Coach
Posts: 3367
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm

Ditka’s dictaphone wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 2:21 pm
The Cooler King wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 8:44 am

Never.

And I don't know what that even is supposed to mean in this context.
Seems unlikely from a “Cooler King”
The Cooler King was a bit of an instigator. How he ended up in the Cooler so much (at least once intentionally).

But I'm wondering if I got mixed up with Rich.

I may be a pedant and odd cap theorist, but certainly not here to spread gasoline on fire.
Fka "BillGeorge61" @CBFans.net
User avatar
southdakbearfan
Head Coach
Posts: 3453
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:23 pm
Location: South Dakota

The Cooler King wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 5:44 pm
Ditka’s dictaphone wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 2:21 pm

Seems unlikely from a “Cooler King”
The Cooler King was a bit of an instigator. How he ended up in the Cooler so much (at least once intentionally).

But I'm wondering if I got mixed up with Rich.

I may be a pedant and odd cap theorist, but certainly not here to spread gasoline on fire.
It's all good, healthy debate.
RichH55
Head Coach
Posts: 3099
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm

Bearfacts wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 1:58 am
RichH55 wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 9:58 pm For some reason you think Orlovsky's NFL Career is pertinent to other discussions about him.

They are not.

I understand you'd rather not admit the error. But it was a logical error nonetheless
Rich, you're not such a bad guy but you do have a bad habit of thinking for others and assuming yours is the only correct way to view something. Your opinions are your own and not necessarily shared by others. You're always free to express them but don't keep pushing an issue that I've already taken time to explain to you what my opinion was based on. If it's not logical to you maybe you've been twisting logic for so long up is down and left is right. I dunno but it's not my job to correct it.

That said I really don't much give a rat's ass about what YOU understand. I understand myself very well and I owe you absolutely nothing. No admission of an error or a fault in any way. My thoughts and opinions are my own and they don't need to conform with yours. In fact most of them probably won't and that OK with me too.

But to avoid even more friction let's do this. You stay on your side of the tracks, I'll stay on mine, and never mistake me for someone you can keep fucking around with.....OK?
Oh. Message Board Toughs. Didn't know Bearfacts was the Wu Tang Clan. I stand corrected!!!!

Orlovsky not having a good NFL career doesn't matter for his evaluation skills (often crappy players are better at that because nothing came natural or easy) - So thats bad

You still seem to think we were Cap hamstrung too. Also not true (Its a fact not an opinion)

But in the spirit of reaching across the aisle:

Diversify Your Bonds
RichH55
Head Coach
Posts: 3099
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm

The Cooler King wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 5:44 pm
Ditka’s dictaphone wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 2:21 pm

Seems unlikely from a “Cooler King”
The Cooler King was a bit of an instigator. How he ended up in the Cooler so much (at least once intentionally).

But I'm wondering if I got mixed up with Rich.

I may be a pedant and odd cap theorist, but certainly not here to spread gasoline on fire.
Im also a pendant and decent with the Cap (you got me beat and I take your knowledge as intended - a place to learn from)

But I have less Tact it seems

And Don't base things on Orlovsky's NFL Stats. Crazy
RichH55
Head Coach
Posts: 3099
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm

The Marshall Plan wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 3:15 pm
RichH55 wrote: Sun May 08, 2022 9:58 pm For some reason you think Orlovsky's NFL Career is pertinent to other discussions about him.

They are not.

I understand you'd rather not admit the error. But it was a logical error nonetheless
Orlovsky gives an opinion about something.

The GOAT Tom Brady gives an opinion about the same thing.

Which one do you trust more?
Is it Tomatoes? The deadly nightshade?

Or Men wearing Ugg Boots in public?
RichH55
Head Coach
Posts: 3099
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm

UOK wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 10:02 am
Bearfacts wrote: Mon May 09, 2022 1:58 am You stay on your side of the tracks, I'll stay on mine, and never mistake me for someone you can keep fucking around with.....OK?
Knock it the fuck off. This kind of rhetoric will not fly around here. "Internet Tough Guy" stuff is begging for arguments and locked threads to occur, as well as potential suspensions.

Everybody calm down, and find some other hills to die on that don't involve this message board.
Feel free to delete my posts as needed.

I'll be sad because I thought the Wu Tang references were solid. Doh
User avatar
UOK
Site Admin
Posts: 23241
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 11:07 am
Location: Champaign, IL

The only wu tang I can quote is Cash Rules Everything Around Me, CREAM, get the money, dolla dolla bill, y’all. Other references will not be recognized.
"None of us are in the board room, locker room, or on the sideline, so in a way, we don't know shit."
- Otis Day
Post Reply