Irn-Bru wrote:VetSkinsFan wrote:If you're having a debate (this being two or more parties having a difference in opinion), it's required to use "what ifs" and your opinions(which are usually based off or morals, beliefs, and feelings). To dicredit him for using these are kinda narrow minded.
I'm okay with using "what ifs" and opinions (all the better if the opinions have more backing than one's feelings, which is all BnG was claiming). But relying on them entirely. . .well, that's another matter. . .
I don't know why Im replying at all, I have already said I was really not trying to argue. And I have told you that I see your point, and only was trying to say "IMO we need a rookie cap. But for some unknown reason I keep on responding. Hmm go figure.
You are saying that I only used "what ifs" that have no more backing than one's feelings. But the "what ifs" I am using, is simply simply "what if so and so is a BUST. It is common knowlege that some draft picks are busts, I don't know how you think I am makeing that up. Should I go look up all the busts for you in the 1st and 2nd rounds over that 5years to prove there are High paid busts every year. I feel this is a lot of work to prove something that is pretty much common knowlege.
Irn-Bru wrote:And, there's still room to criticize a bad argument if it's a bad argument. Ultimately, BnG's case rests on the assumption that there is no reliable correlation between any individual player's history before entering the NFL and his performance in the NFL. But that's patently absurd. (There's a reason that most probowl-caliber players are drafted in the 1st and 2nd rounds, after all. . .).
Do I have to go back and quote myself as well, why am I responding if you aren't going to bother reading them. I told you I don't want to dismiss what they have done at the college level. But what a guy does at a college level don't ALWAYS turn into the same production in the NFL, is what I said, remember the word I used above "Bust". There is a reason a guy is drafted in the 1st and 2nd round, this is why I said there should be some leeway to pay some more or less.
Irn-Bru wrote:VetSkinsFan wrote:And what is wrong with a rookie salary cap? What is wrong with a player coming in and earning his money based on his PAST CURRENT LEVEL EXPERIENCE?
I haven't said that I'm against the rookie salary cap. In fact, I don't think it's a bad idea. But there's a bit difference between a rookie salary cap and some of the ideas that I'm seeing on this board (e.g., establishing set contracts for the first overall pick, second, etc).
I don't recall saying there should be a set contract for the first overall pick, I said, I think there is a differece value in the 1st and so on pick, so the teams should be able to have leeway there. I only said, I don't think there is a big difference in value between the 1st overall pick and the 2nd overall pick. Where do you get out of that, that we need a set contract for the first overall pick? You're putting words in my mouth that I simply have not said.
Irn-Bru wrote:VetSkinsFan wrote:To say a rookie has proven anything on the professional level is absurd short of how fast he can run or catch a ball in a T-shirt. That's being done all across the nation in back yards and parks.
So playing college at the Div. 1 level prepares players for the NFL only as much as sandlot pickup games?
Maybe you can see why I think BnG and you are completely discounting a very important aspect of what's going on here.

When did I say that again. How did saying, what a player does in college don't mean he can do the same in the NFL, turn into, "what he did in college means nothing in the draft or for his value"?
Edited to fix stupid spelling errors.
I firmly believe the Patriots are the antichrist.