Hoss

You came hard demanding too much from other teams but then this one is a rotten egg. Seguin makes no sense for this team and is on a long contract than Jack for the same number. Not to mention he has a NMC anyways. Those trades you suggested all include prospects better than anyone in the Duchene deal AND you've got one or two firsts in two loaded drafts from teams that may not be great.

You’re not getting any of those deals. A healthy Eichel might not get those.

Ducks, Wild and Rangers I’d do (in that order). Calgary I would not.

One year, $2M

Meh

But very few upsets have a wide scoring margin so your logic still doesn’t hold. As far as your last line: miss me with that. You stated a position and I’m countering it. This is a public discussion forum that’s the entire point. Of course I’ll watch what I want to watch and you’ll watch what you want. I happen to watch and enjoy both.

But by your logic there are no true upsets in CFB then because who is to say the better team wouldn’t have overcome the deficit if the game went on longer? On a long enough timeline every player is dead anyways. I don’t agree at all that college football is more pure football. The talent differences are so big that the big schools don’t play football, it’s just practice for them. WRs burn through the secondaries because there are just not enough talented corners and safeties to go around which is why teams routinely put up 50-70 points in those games. It’s low-effort, high-scoring football. I don’t know that I’m convinced that’s what football is supposed to be.

Yup. They have a loan program that was established in like ‘14 that most new stadiums have taken advantage of since. It’s either $250M or $350M I believe.

Fun fact: all words are made up.

I am so confused by this take. How are upsets more possible on CFB because there are almost always blowouts? Are you saying by you need leagues/levels to establish a dominant power in order for you to be entertained? If so, you’re explanation of it is a little weird.

…….. Wut

*except the Jets

As someone who roots for the Nationals and Blue Jays (both thanks mostly to Vladimir Guerrero, ironically - Blue Jays being a more recent thing) it was a rough deadline. From a Blue Jays perspective: what in the ***** is this team doing giving up Austin Martin in a Berrios trade? Was Martin expendable? Sure, sort of. They've got plenty of infielders who are young in the system in front of him but he's also already started working out at center. He is a very good prospect and I'll be surprised if he's not a good MLB player. I like Berrios. He's good and he is under control BUT he's nothing more than a 3 or AT BEST a 2 in your rotation. If he's your 2 you're probably not contending in today's league. From the Nats: that Scherzer/Turner trade ... YIKES. The return they got should have been in exchange for Turner alone. He's one of the top five shortstops in the entire game and is under control for another season. He's having his best offensive season to date ... and that's what you get WITH the best starter on the market attached to him? I'm not a big believer in either of the top prospects they got in exchange either. Then they flip the rest of their expiring guys (except Zimmerman who was never going to play elsewhere) for a bunch of nothing. They got nobody prospects.

Raiders fans are definitely rabid. Why would Terry give up the ability to do both because that is absolutely what is coming - both.

LOL

GMTM is the best GM we've had post-Regier and that's obviously a low bar but his abrasive personality obviously cost him a career. His abrasive personality also probably had something to do with his inability to understand what team building really is.

Yup. We can keep acting like teams have control just because there's a contract but that hasn't been reality in a long long time. The contract certainly affords the team some leverage but the NMC holds a ton of weight and could screw us. There's no reason to test that theory.

if that’s how this works we should all demand much more of our employers

https://youtu.be/5wUXuIcRGi4

You’re on one today. Keep going!

People severely responding to an unverified report about something that is nowhere near final.

I’d say the general response to this first offer at what is likely to be a years-long negotiation says more about the state of things than the first offer does.

There are only three current stadiums that were built with 100% public funds (this does not consider renovations: Highmark Stadium (Bills - cost $22M to build) Arrowhead Stadium (Chiefs - cost $43M to build) Raymond James (Bucs - cost $194M to build) Did some math based on this website (they incorrectly state that the Bills was 100% private when the original $22M for the stadium was 100% public funding). Not counting the Rams/Chargers stadium (because it’s a complex bigger than Disney that only LA could pull off and is “privately” funded) and the 49ers stadium (because their funding agreement is laid too complex to simply lay out a number but is also a likely model for future funding deals): NFL stadiums have cost $14,178,300,000. Of that, $6,184,900,000 has been public funding. That’s about 44% of public funding for stadiums. So that’s gives you an idea of what the actual cost may be.