Big Bob currently under fire: "Cant let the inmates run the prison"

Huh? What did he say that was so bad?

He wants the players to focus on the Saints.

He already came out this week talking about how he supports the players in social issues.

 

True. I was wrong. He can't help how he feels, and I shouldn't have said that. I just found it such a warped comparison coming from a guy who gets paid millions.

 

You can't help the way others feel. But that doesn't mean that the reason for them feeling that way isn't stupid. If I say "hello" and you take offense to that, that's on you, not me.

So, sure, he can say he felt like a "slave" and that's fine. But that doesn't mean it's not a stupid analogy based on exactly what you said in your previous post.

 

Name one "inmate" that is free....

 

Bob McNair, who gave millions to minority causes while alive, and was dying of cancer, and messes up a common adage and is suddenly a horrible person. That whole incident was ridiculous. Cut the man some slack. He was not well, obviously. He meant no harm. Bob McNair was not a racist, ever, never. He was a very fine person and had every right to his political views and personal opinions. Intellectual fascism is alive and well. Let's move on.

 

Actually, he doesn't, beyond retiring - which would, unlike most retirements, actually cost him millions of dollars, assuming he was under contract.

Yes, Deandre Hopkins is well-compensated. But put that aside and consider: he had no choice where he worked; he was, instead, drafted to a team/city that might not have been to his liking - with no legitimate recourse to change it. He had no control over where he was drafted, which then affected how much money he would be allowed to make, nor did he have control over the amount of his first contract as that was mandated by the union/league. He's then under contract for as many as five years, with limited recourse to renegotiate, at which point, his employer has full control over the amount of money he can earn in the subsequent two years via a franchise tag, whereby they can effectively lessen his earning potential long-term. And his entire salary structure is dictated by a salary cap designed to keep salaries down while other reap untold millions on *his* efforts.

No, don't feel sorry for DeAndre Hopkins, as he is rich beyond belief. At the same time, those riches have absolutely come with - in some cases, severe limitations that many of us do not have to deal with. I would never begrudge someone feeling trapped in that environment, despite how well he's compensated.

 

Yes he does, he just has "no choice" among the teams in the league which he can play for. He is not compelled to work for the NFL and has just as much choice where he works as anyone.

You seem to fail to realize that the NFL is a government-granted monopoly that is exempt from fair labor laws, as it must be. That's why they have a mandated labor union and a negotiated contract...so that these issues can be equitably addressed. He is not a victim, he is a player who must comply with the terms of the negotiated contract if he wishes to be employed by the league. He had a choice and he made it.

Interestingly, people who work under no-compete clauses, of which there are many, arguably have less choice where they work than NFL players do.

 

Rich people complain way too much.

 

I don't give a **** what color you are or what your ancestry comprises, that doesn't exclude you from saying something stupid. Just like Uncle Bob, Hop said something stupid when he used the word "again" in his comment. "Again," as in "once more" does not apply for Hop personally and I think it's a bit disrespectful to his ancestors but it was an accidental mistake imo. People's careers or lives shouldn't be destroyed for accidental mistakes. Nobody involved in this fiasco has deeply rooted bias or hate period.

 

OK...

I never claimed he was a victim - and you do understand monopolies are the enemy of choice?

People have the choice of working for companies in their field that don't require non-compete clauses. But, as you stated, because the NFL is a monopoly, Hopkins (and the other players) are denied that choice if they want to play professional football.

Also, a non-compete clause is much more limited than the NFL. It's a really bad comparison. No non-compete clause would ever regulate a person's job opportunities and salary ceiling for seven years.

 

I do not understand that, I understand that you've carefully phrased that to make it seem like it supports your argument.

A player doesn't get to choose his team which is a protection he sacrifices because of the league's exemption, but that player IS COMPENSATED handsomely for that through benefits he receives under the labor agreement.

A player plays under an NFL contract, not a team contract. It is negotiated by a team but must be approved by the league, must comply with the labor agreement and must be transferrable to any other team. When you consider that players are NFL employees, it is easily seen that their situation is not different materially over any other employee of a typical company. That their particular employer must receive government exceptions because of monopoly considerations doesn't change the player's choice one bit, much less be "the enemy" of it. Now, of course the NFL isn't a company but a cartel of independently owned "business units" skirting labor laws. Still, the analogy holds.

I disagree. In many professions such clauses are pervasive and can have a chilling effect on future employment opportunities for many years. Often times, even if one negotiates out of such a clause, he's still affected because employers engage with one another to avoid poaching. Also, football players can choose to play outside the NFL, they are not "denied that choice" by the league. Sure, they won't get paid a million a game, but I don't either. Don't confuse a disparity in pay with lack of choice, otherwise all your left with is entitlement.

Regardless, it is hypocritical for a player to sign a contract agreeing to conditions, get paid extravagantly because of the conditions, then complain about the conditions. That's all that's happening here, along with fans being gaslighted by millionaire players and agents as part of negotiating tactics.

 

Again, as I've said repeatedly - no one should feel sorry for Deandre Hopkins. He is rich. However, that compensation comes with restrictions that many people are quick to dismiss because they think having money trumps everything else. He has made genuine compromises to acquire that wealth which can mitigate the lazy, "shut & play" that permeates sports talk.

No, it doesn't. Employees have free choice; NFL employees' choices are, for as many as seven years, restricted. There is nothing analogous to it in the "real world."

They are limited in scope, and there is compensation associated with it to offset those limitations. They are also industry-driven, not profession-driven, which means a lawyer for an oil company might not be able to work for another oil company - but they are not precluded from working as a lawyer outside of that industry.

It is a poor analogy.

I didn't call the NFL a monopoly; you did. By definition, a monopoly limits choice.

Complaining about your job is by no means the exclusive domain of highly-compensated athletes. Everybody does it, no matter their pay. The difference is that the vast majority of employees have choices to alleviate any dissatisfaction. NFL players do not. You can express dissatisfaction with those restrictions while still being grateful for the good things the job does provide.

 

This thread was stupid last year and it's still stupid today. Many folks are sad miserable idiotic facks. Oh and this sub is TRASH...

 

Compensation that is negotiated in consideration of those restrictions, and compensation received while complaining about those restrictions.

NFL players are not restricted from playing outside the NFL whereas other professionals frequently are restricted from practicing theirs. You have it backwards.

Wow, you can lead a horse to water...

No-compete clauses are limited in scope, but NOT as limited as NFL players are! And what compensation is there? And how is an NFL contract not "industry-driven"? And how is an NFL player "precluded from working as an athlete, or football player, outside the NFL? Players aren't even restricted from working other jobs during the season!

Ridiculous.

And I shouldn't have, because it is a distraction and is irrelevant.

But...the NFL is arguably a monopoly controlling a particular form of entertainment. That in no way suggests that it "limits choice" of employment. Perhaps you should look up the definition of "monopoly" because you're not even close.

The government grants monopolies frequently. Take a utility for instance. You may have no choice in electric company where you live, but that doesn't mean the electric company employees have not choice of jobs.

Again, ridiculous.

Being an elite player and qualifying to play in the NFL doesn't limit your options, it expands them by at least one. Claiming that NFL players don't have options is absurd, we see them exercise options all the time. Take Luck for instance.

The assertion that players don't have options is pure entitlement, it is rooted in the idea that these players are entitled to what they get paid and are over the barrel because they can only get it in one place, as opposed to deserving the opportunity for teams to bid on them. They get the high salaries BECAUSE of the labor agreement that results from the labor practices, not because their services demand that salary in a free market.

Players would not be paid the obscene amounts of money they do without the existence of the league and the billionaire owners driving it, a league that is fundamentally predicated on the unfair labor practices that cause the bargaining agreements that generate those unreasonable salaries. A player complaining about his lack of "choices" is THE classic example of biting the hand that feeds you. A player can have the salary or the choices, not both.

 

But this post is pure gold!

 

Just here to point out that the NFL is not a monopoly, see the USFL/XFL/etc. MLB is the only US sport with an anti-trust exemption.

 

DELETE