I don’t recall any backlash in the last negotiations when Upshaw kept still until 58% and the possibility of an uncapped year was on the table. The backlash was that he was being moronic and didn’t realize that the uncapped year was not good for the players in the overall longterm.

I think a lot of fans want to see more benefits for retired players. I also think they would like to see more protection for vets. That guys like Bruce Smith, etc. have to finish their careers in other uniforms needs to be addressed. (I use Smith as an example because he had more in the tank than others when he moved from Buffalo.)

I don’t think guaranteed contracts are the answer. I don’t think it’s right, just because 3/4 of the major sports have them. Where else in reality do they exist? CEO’s don’t always get them. There are ways of making the systems work without it.

Your point is dead on. And, of course, the fact that the owners are vastly wealthier than the players never seems to stop them from complaining about players’ salaries, and “cost certainty” and all the other garbage they come up with to justify why they really do have legitimate gripes about money. In this, the sports media gives owners an entirely free pass.

And then, you realize how sad the situation described above is, since they actually have a union that is supposed to be supporting them.

I can only believe that the signing bonus’ are blinding them from reforming their own union. Because it IS their union.

Damn, should have known you’d be on the cutting edge.

I think about Al Toon, who can’t look at an operating ceiling
fan because of too many concussions. Earl Campbell has dropfoot,
It took Johnnie Cooks FIVE minutes to get up from a chair on
Real Sports. Football may not be war, but are those not war
wounds? Tim Layden wasn’t trying to be informative, he was
pimping the NFL. The players are disposable, the game. as always,
goes on.

Wish I could help out. I’ve become so disgusted with MSM that I’m not the one to ask.

Alan Schwarz’ first piece on Andre Waters came out in January, and the ESPN piece I linked to is from 2006. There’s just no excuse (I know you’re not trying to make one for him) for Layden having characterized the NFL committee the way he did – he has to have had all the pertinent information available to him before he wrote this article.

Maybe I’ll have to stop being a creature of habit and kick my years-old SI addiction. My lady will certainly be happy.

Any good mag recommendations?

As a life-long SI suscriber, I, along with many others, have questioned the magazine’s relevancy over the past few years. I read the article a few days ago and wondered what the point of the article even was? My feeling was that it was just a puff piece to get NFL fans ready for the upcoming season again. Not a lot of journalisic fresh information, or any hook to make me think after putting the mag down.

Cases like Ted Johnson and Andre Waters are sad. As a Boston resident, I’ve seen Ted Johnson go from quite an upstanding guy to someone who has made some bizarre public appearances and behaved very erratically. The radio stations and Boston MSM don’t even welcome him to their programs much anymore, and he used to be a regular.

Investigations into his head injury, and others, and how the NFL has really turned a blind eye, need to be documented and hashed out. This puff-SI piece did nothing to adavnce the discussion, or turn up the heat on the NFL.

The NFL: they’re just “concerned.”

Outstanding analysis.