The Official 2008/2009 NFL Football Thread...

Status
Not open for further replies.
^Hmm. Could it be the $millions$ that have made 'em soft today?

That and they have played under the rules that let them be that way. They haven't had to constantly had to pick themselves up after being leveled by people that didn't like them at all levels of play and took it to them because of it. Plus a good portion of players have lived their whole life and got away with being lazy because of their talent, and have had a lot of things in life tailored for them. If they didn't like something or struggled in school a lot of them either had help cheating by that school or had garbage classes invented for them so they didn't have to do work. If they wanted to screw around instead of working hard a lot of the coaches will look the other way where somebody else on the team would almost be kicked off right way, and the list goes on. A lot of players feel a sense of entitlement because, quite frankly, they have always gotten what they wanted their entire lives once they hit post-adolescence and their talent became visible whether they deserved it or not. I think that's also a reason there so many malcontents today. Not that there weren't a lot before but they are malcontents in a different way where they put themselves above winning even instead of just being arrogant.
 
^
I believe you've just made the case that the NFL should be obligated to pay college athletes to play. The University makes plenty of money to cover the cost of an athletic scholarship. The NFL reaps the benefits of the colleges as "minor leagues"....so...maybe it's time to give college athletes a stipend?
 

biomech

Virtus Junxit Mors Non Separabit
^
I believe you've just made the case that the NFL should be obligated to pay college athletes to play. The University makes plenty of money to cover the cost of an athletic scholarship. The NFL reaps the benefits of the colleges as "minor leagues"....so...maybe it's time to give college athletes a stipend?

Something should be done for the college athletes, when you look at the millions of dollars some of these programs bring in to the school its crazy.
 
^
I believe you've just made the case that the NFL should be obligated to pay college athletes to play. The University makes plenty of money to cover the cost of an athletic scholarship. The NFL reaps the benefits of the colleges as "minor leagues"....so...maybe it's time to give college athletes a stipend?

No, what I would rather see is places of higher education not have anything to do at all with sports at the level they do and not treat it like a business. That way athletes that don't really care about higher education and basically take up joke courses, wouldn't take up spots that could go to people that want to be there, and you would end all the corruption at that level because of it. Places of higher education just plain shouldn't be in the sports business. (Even education they shouldn't treat as a business, but that's another subject.) What I would rather see is some of the smaller independent leagues be bigger than they are or an actual farm team scenario like in MLB, (Except players wouldn't belong to any one team while in the system and would have to be drafted like normal.)where athletes that want to try out for professional sports at a seriously level could go into. In some ways I can't totally blame the athletes. If I was a top high school talent that wanted to play pro football but didn't really care about higher education at this time I really have no choice but to go into a football program at a university, with all that entails, if I really want a chance. If there was another viable option (And no the Canadian Football league, and Area Football aren't among them) then they could go to that for a year or two, get paid, and the pros would have a chance to get a good look at them.
 

Violator79

Take a Hit, Spunker!
Just a random GO STEELERS!!!
 
^^^^^

Not really, Chicago has a lot of holes on offense.

Denver still stays good on offense, plus we got the picks to fill in our defensive needs now.
 
^^^^^

Not really, Chicago has a lot of holes on offense.

Denver still stays good on offense, plus we got the picks to fill in our defensive needs now.

Assuming Denver drafts well.

We'll have to wait and see.

Knowing what Denver wanted for Cutler, I'm glad San Fran didn't get him now.
 
Cutler goes to the Chicago Bears for 2 1st round picks, (09,10), an 09 3rd round pick and Kyle Orton.

Chicago wins this trade now, Denver wins this trade in 5 years and beyond.

http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=534281

I tend to agree with this.

While the Bears landed a legit QB,still,who the fuck is he going to throw to?

I personally believe that Hester isn't going to be as effective as everyone seems to think.He's a poor route runner who just wants to go deep at full speed.They will just start bringing the safety over to help in coverage more now.

The only people that will really benefit are Olsen and Forte,and if the offensive coordinator doesn't come up with a more imaginative scheme,it will just be more of the same old same old.

Don't get me wrong,this is a huge pick up,but I really think that they could have got more value from improving other positions.

And one more thing,what's going to happen down the road if the Bears don't get the weapons that Cutler needs to throw for 4k yards/year?Will he be the same old whinny bitch that wanted out of Denver?I guess like T.O. says,"Getcha popcorn ready".
 
Denver only wins in the future if they can find another good quarterback, or if Cutler doesn't pan out for another team like people think he will. It's so hard to get one that having only a mediocre quarterback can really drag a team down for a long time compared to one with a superstar. If Cutler just becomes an above average starter than it's different, but if he becomes the next generation Manning or Brady then it was still a losing trade.

There is another way of looking at this. Besides Urlacher, the Bears have sucked on first round picks for about two decades now. The rest of the draft they do ok on. (Of course they have sucked at getting great quarterbacks since about the 1940s.) Maybe they figure they aren't loosing much by not having the draft picks. They need to get a better younger offensive line though, and the defense isn't going to hold out forever.
 

Deeeze

Tig Ol' Bitty Expert
I would of loved to see Cutler go to Minnesota but I am so happy he didn't go to the deadskins :D
 
they are gonna ruin football with all these baby rules just like they are doing basketball . i mean back in the bad boy pistons day was awesome basketball . now does if you sneeze while gaurding kobe or d wade or the king its a foul.

let them play the sport how it is suppose to be played the way our four fathers made it
 
one of ESPN's draft pundits is predecting the Broncos will draft Mark Sanchez at 12. I think Chris Simms might be Denver's starter intially and do not be surprised if they move Orton for more picks

red001
 
one of ESPN's draft pundits is predecting the Broncos will draft Mark Sanchez at 12. I think Chris Simms might be Denver's starter intially and do not be surprised if they move Orton for more picks

red001

I pray to God that doesn't happen! Plus, Sanchez won't be available at 12 anyways because people are so anamored of him throwing against air.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top