Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

    Originally posted by KingGeorge View Post
    Why? We went 10-6 last year with half of our starters injured, and were a minute away from beating the Jets with Garcon, White, and Tamme. We probably shouldn't have won since the Jags and Texans had a meltdown, but we still managed to win nonetheless. Maybe it is better to keep the same core of guys rather than bringing in and losing players each year. As long as we have Manning, I believe we will always have a chance at winning the Super Bowl.
    We can't stop the run or run the ball. That just kills you in the NFL. If we get some better linemen soon we have a shot, but I just don't see that happening.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

      Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
      I hate to break it to you no I don't actually he's not the God of GM's and definately not the best. He could've learned to built a balanced team on offense and defense The Best would actually get over his own overblown ego and realize that his way isn't always the best way.


      How many times do we have to see a bend or break defense? Woeful special teams?

      Every year...

      Then there's the epic fail of throwing away the perfect season for nothing?

      Sure the Colts are better than a lot of teams but they aren't the best either if they were they would've won more than 1 SB.

      What's your point? We can't have high expectations? Oh wait that's spoiled right?

      Teams have limited chances of cashing in on multiple SB's and I felt this team has underachieved you don't your choice.

      However expecting more out of this team and not being content with great regular seasons woeful playoffs doesn't make someone less of a fan of the team either.
      Please show me where I said I was content. I didn't. I've said it multiple times, year after year, that I don't agree with some of the decisions/directions gone by Polian.

      But I'm not dumb enough to try and call Polian, a man who took an expansion team to the SB in just a few short years, a bad GM. Hell, not even an "average" GM.

      Polian has won more GM of the Year awards than anyother GM in history. I think that say's something about the way he runs a team.

      But yet here we are, another summer going passed and Colts fans are upset because they didn't make any big FA signings.

      Yawn.

      For all the money that Washington and Dallas throw around, when was the last time they went to the SB? But good thing they sign free agents!! Their GM must really know how to make a balanced team!

      Every summer we read about how the Colts are standing still, while teams around them get better. Then every season the Colts go out and stay at the top of the league.

      Doom and gloom every summer. Why should I expect this offseason to be any different?
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

        There is no doubt that Polian is one of the better GMs in the league. The guy builds winners. No one can take that away from him.

        My frustration with Polian is not from being active in free agency. I don't expect him to spend a lot of money every year. Sure it is important to try and add guys to fill the team but they don't need to go after guys who break the bank.

        My frustration comes from a number of different areas. Number one is this team relys on Peyton Manning and the rest of the offense way too much. The defense is built to play with a lead. So if the offense isn't doing so hot the Colts are screwed.

        Speaking of the defense I don't get why he neglects the DT position. Yes he has drafted several but not very high. This has been the weakest position on the defense for years even though it is one of the most important. It has been going on for years.

        Going back to the offense I have a problem with the offensive line. This team has issues running the ball and it has for a while. I know that he has made an effort to change this lately but he throws the O-Line under the bus after the Superbowl loss, cuts one of the better ones, and with his first pick in the draft he selects....a defensive end!?!

        The draft is another issue. The Colts rely on the draft as much as any team in the league. So in 2010 he takes a DE and while I understand why it was not a good pick just based on the fact that they need guys who can contribute right away. The past several years the picks haven't worked out and/or were taken on guys who play positions that were not as big of a need. Of course it is easy to look back and say that the Colts should have taken this guy instead of that one.

        My frustration with Polian comes from the reoccurring weaknesses on the team and how they have attempted or not attempted to address them. When the season ends the same and the team has the same weaknesses it becomes very frustrating season after season.

        I use the term frustration because thats what it is...frustrating. To see a team that is Superbowl caliber year after year yet not win it due to the same issues year after year is just frustrating.

        But like i said you can't take anything away from Polian. He is one of the best GMs in the league. I am not saying I want him fired. However being one of the best GMs in football doesn't make your teams problems any less frustrating to fans.

        I understand where you are coming form though Since86. Some fans do go overboard when criticizing Polian.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          Please show me where I said I was content. I didn't. I've said it multiple times, year after year, that I don't agree with some of the decisions/directions gone by Polian.

          But I'm not dumb enough to try and call Polian, a man who took an expansion team to the SB in just a few short years, a bad GM. Hell, not even an "average" GM.

          Polian has won more GM of the Year awards than anyother GM in history. I think that say's something about the way he runs a team.

          But yet here we are, another summer going passed and Colts fans are upset because they didn't make any big FA signings.

          Yawn.

          For all the money that Washington and Dallas throw around, when was the last time they went to the SB? But good thing they sign free agents!! Their GM must really know how to make a balanced team!

          Every summer we read about how the Colts are standing still, while teams around them get better. Then every season the Colts go out and stay at the top of the league.

          Doom and gloom every summer. Why should I expect this offseason to be any different?


          Funny I don't recall saying he was a bad GM feel free to go back and point it out(Oh that's right I never said that)

          I however don't think he's the best thing since sliced bread either. Wininng multiple GM of the year awards means nothing to me if he doesn't build the team that gives us the SB's to match(and for all his arrogance you'd think we'd have more than 1 SB)


          I don't expect major FA signings I do expect this team to be more balanced and to fix problems they have had for years like a good DT and special teams. You don't need fancy names to do that BUT at times it is a good idea.

          The same exact problems he always ignores and always does us in. Its frustrating as a fan to watch and they do nothing about it. Its sad watching a team you know can accomplish more just settle for doing what they do when it has shown to not be enough to win championships.

          And we're not going to have Manning forever either. I expected this team to have more championships and in the end they won't so yes I find it disappointing given how we may never have a once in a lifetime player like him ever again.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

            The same exact problems he always ignores and always does us in. Its frustrating as a fan to watch and they do nothing about it.
            Funny, I think it's injuries that have killed the Colts.

            The same exact problems he always ignores and always does us in. Its frustrating as a fan to watch and they do nothing about it. Its sad watching a team you know can accomplish more just settle for doing what they do when it has shown to not be enough to win championships.
            Yeah you're right. It's not like they've been to the SuperBowl twice out of the last five years or anything.

            How many tackles has Bill missed? How many fumbles? How many INTs?

            Oh....only players play the game? Huh.... You can argue that the Colts should have more SB rings, that's fine and dandy, but it's the GMs job to put in place a team that has a chance.

            The Colts have the pieces to win a SB every freaking year. That's a pretty good job well done. If the players get hurt, or can't make the plays in the playoffs that they do in the regular season, how is that the GMs fault?

            Did Polian use his stone hands to whiff on the onside kick, or did Hank Baskett? I'm drawing a blank here......

            The Colts put together a championship caliber team every year. Sorry the players actually have to execute, and rings aren't given away on paper.

            Once again, I'm not saying Bill has done a perfect job. Sure, he's made mistakes, but so does every GM. I'm saying he makes less than the other teams in the league, which is why the Colts are right there in the mix every year like clock work. You don't get that type of team with just an average GM.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

              Football is a game of attrition. A good GM will build a roster to cope with that, even in the extereme, and going into a new year won't just be guessing that "our luck will turn" and everyone will be healthy.

              Players getting hurt are in part the GM's fault if nobody is there to pick up the slack. Drafting guys whose interest in football is so low that they'd rather play video games than practice is the GM's fault.

              Did injuries kill the Packers last year? I believe they were way up there on the most players on IR / most starters lost/ most starting player games lost stats.

              Most NFL teams have significant injuries and have to go on into the playoffs without a dozen or more guys that they were counting on. What is really odd is when one of those teams publicly whines about it, from the owner on down to the last player on the bench.
              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

                You can only have a 53 man roster, or atleast could. There are 22 starting positions in football. That's not including positions like PK, punter, long snapper.

                So right there you have 25 players, who are just starters or purely skill players.

                Out of the remaining 28 players, how many back-up OLinemen do you need? How many DLinemen? How many LBs? How many DBs?

                You only get so many players, which is why your backups often times are primary backups for multiple positions.


                Just because the Packers had a lot, and were able to overcome them and win, doesn't mean that the Colts should be held to the same standard.

                Timing of injury, severity, time to recover from injury, all are different for each player and team. You can't compare the two situations on the same team, let alone different teams.

                Is it a built in excuse? Sure, maybe. But it's the truth. Sometimes **** happens, and you can't overcome it. Is it the "fault" of anyone, or is it just the situation you find yourself in due to uncontrollable circumstances?

                More often than not it's just uncontrollable circumstances.


                Bob Sanders bucks the idea. Polian held on to him way too long, but it would have really hurt if Bob would have, or even if, kept healthy for another team.

                And yet we have another thread discussing some FAs the Colts did sign. People are just upset because they don't go out and overpay for FAs that get gobbled up first.


                Yes, the Colts need to upgrade some positions. They need more depth. But going out and trading/signing for players like Haynesworth/Asomugha isn't the answer either. You can't make moves just to make moves.

                If Polian had Jerry Jones as an owner, or even Dan Snyder, who just don't care about spending money, then I would want to see more risks taken. But they don't own the Colts.

                I don't expect the Simons to spend like Jerry Buss, and I certainly don't expect Jim Irsay to spend like Jerry Jones.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  If Polian had Jerry Jones as an owner, or even Dan Snyder, who just don't care about spending money, then I would want to see more risks taken. But they don't own the Colts.

                  I don't expect the Simons to spend like Jerry Buss, and I certainly don't expect Jim Irsay to spend like Jerry Jones.
                  Why is there a financial effect at all? Last year, with no cap, was an aberration, but even then there were very few owners spending like crazy (I think Jerry Jones topped the list).

                  Polian's hands are not tied by totally funds to use, any more than any other GM. There's a salary cap, and a salary floor, and for this year and next, at least, the floor is like 95% or more of the cap. Cheapskate Mike Brown in Cincinnati will spend at least 95 cents for every dollar Jerry Jones spends.

                  I would imagine over time the Colts have spent about as much as everyone else, so I'm not seeing how that is some sort of special hardship that Bill Polian has to deal with.
                  The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

                    Polian drafted Manning over Leaf.

                    That gives him a pass for all his stupid draft mistakes. Ugoh, Pollack, Brown, & Hughes. Keep in mind Matt Millen missed a lot w/ earlier picks. Millen drafts WR's like Polian draft offensive line man.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

                      You just shifted the argument to how the Colts were ran, under the old CBA, to how they are going to be ran under the new CBA.

                      I'm not fimiliar enough with the details to really give a good answer. My answer depends on the answer to a pretty important question.

                      How is the salary cap setup? Is it a softcap, like the NBA?

                      If that's the case, then no, Mike Brown isn't going to pay 95cents to every $1 that Jerry Jones spends. Jones is merely going to continue to overpay, and just pay the penalty.

                      Which is exactly what Jerry Buss does, and something the Simons cannot do.

                      And if it's a hardcap, then you can point out that overpaying for one players can cripple the rest of the team.


                      But then again, that is a question that will be answered in the future, since there's a new CBA, and you can't base an answer on how they handled business under the old CBA.

                      I'm not claiming hardship. He could very well have the ability to overpay players. That really doesn't matter. What he's able to do, and what he's willing to do, are two completely seperate things.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

                        It's a hard cap and has always been a hard cap, since free agency began in the NFL. There was always a maximum and a minimum each team could spend, and the range used to be greater, but it was never huge. If one team was spending up to the cap of say100 million, other teams had to spend above the floor, which was less but was something like 90 million or so. Now the range is really tight.

                        The only effect big markets have on football is in the non-player expenditures. I guess you could say that some teams, with higher mechandise sales, can afford more scouts and support staff. At least that's what Mike Brown and family always argued in Cincinnati
                        The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

                          That's kinda a half truth. The NFL always have had ways around the cap. Non-guaranteed contracts, signing bonuses that don't fully go against the cap, incentives. There's a number of different ways to hand out money to players, while avoiding a full cap hit.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

                            signing bonuses are part of the cap- it is spread out over the length of the contract.

                            I think that money for most contract clauses even count under the cap. There is some formula the league office uses that calculates how likely it is to achieve the incentive, and if it is deemed likely and it is indeed met, it counts against the cap. For example, if Peyton has a clause calling for a 100K bonus for making the pro bowl, the formula would show it as a likely attainable incentive (he's made it often), and it would count against the cap. If Pierre Garcon had the same contract clause and if he made the pro bowl, his pro bowl bonus wouldn't count against the cap because at the time of the contract, it was an "unlikely to achieve" incentive.

                            Nonguaranteed contracts are a way around, but most have a signing bonus, and the pro-rated signing bonus is a cap charge, even if the player is cut.

                            There must be some type of loopholes I'm not aware of, though, to make certain odd facts possible, such as how Peyton's cap hit is 16 million on a contract that averages 18 million and is actually front-loaded so that the the first year the compensation (including pro-rated signing bonus) is 23 million. It would seem to me the cap hit ought to be 18 million or more.

                            Maybe there are small percentage adjustments with veteran players. I know that if you sign a vet with 5+ years experience and he makes minimum salary, your cap hit is zero dollars for him. I think the cap hit for a vet making more than the minimum is also reduced by the minimum salary amount. That's a little clause that players got to incentivize keeping veterans.

                            The bottom line is that, however, NFL payroll varies in a narrow range of under 10% (and less now), unlike NBA and MLB. Also NFL total revenue is like 95% TV revenue and is shared equally. NFL ownership is very much a socialistic experience from the revenue side.
                            Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 08-02-2011, 03:26 PM.
                            The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

                              I have seen multiple people say bonuses don't go against the cap here lately. Or say that it goes against the cap less than the normal pay.

                              Both are entirely untrue and I have no idea where people got these ideas.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Does Peyton Deserve more $$$ Than Tom Brady?

                                Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                                I have seen multiple people say bonuses don't go against the cap here lately. Or say that it goes against the cap less than the normal pay.

                                Both are entirely untrue and I have no idea where people got these ideas.

                                Because there are so many loopholes, and exceptions, and rules about re-negiotated contracts, waived/released players, having an exception to be able to waive 2 players after July 1st, etc.

                                The rules are complicated, and drawn out, and ever changing. With it comes confusion.

                                http://www.eaglescap.com/analyzingCBA.html

                                There's an article about the cap hits, and even the explanations are confusing.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X