Goodells Nightmare

Share this page

Hawg73 said:
It's just getting started for Roger.

The wheels that have been set in motion are ultimately going to run him right over. I feel more sure of that now than I did a few months ago. The Pats (especially Brady) will be the prime catalyst, but ultimately his entire body of incompetent work and idiotic decision-making will finally turn the 32 against him.

I can't wait for the bullshit "Roger Goodell has decided to pursue other opportunities in the private sector -- we wish him well" excuse that'll be run up the flagpole within the next year or so.

I'm calling it now. This season will be his last with the NFL.
Click to expand...

i hope you are right, i just have a hard time believing the owners care about anything goodell does unless it negatively effects revenue.

when kraft showed up at the owners meetings stuck a finger in the air to see which way the wind blows and instantly caved on his "gonna fight this" stance, i think that tells us all we need to know how the other owners feel about goodell.

as long as the gravy train keeps rolling along goodell is safe imho
 
D2maine said:
i hope you are right, i just have a hard time believing the owners care about anything goodell does unless it negatively effects revenue.

when kraft showed up at the owners meetings stuck a finger in the air to see which way the wind blows and instantly caved on his "gonna fight this" stance, i think that tells us all we need to know how the other owners feel about goodell.

as long as the gravy train keeps rolling along goodell is safe imho
Click to expand...
This ^^^^

Even Kraft loves him so much he talked himself into blaming the lawyers instead of the Ommisioner. He's got more support with the owners than ever, and will more than likely be extended when the time comes. Making money is all any of these guys care about, and scandals like framegate actually increase ratings, merchandise sales, etc. Don't be surprised if there's an annual "independent investigation" every offseason.
 
DeflatedFan said:
Making money is all any of these guys care about
Click to expand...
You have a remarkably biased attitude toward people about whom you know very little.

For example, look into what Paul Allen has done since he retired from Microsoft. Being the owner of professional sports teams is only a fraction of what interests him, and he does a tremendous amount of philanthropic work.

And that just one of the owners. I'll grant you that some of the owners are real pieces of work (Jim Irsay), and few approach the Paul Allen level, but to assume that a single two-word phrase (making money) adequately describes all 32 owners is naïve in the extreme.
 
<i>I think Gronk is going to be suspended for the Colts game and both Jets games for it.</i>

Probably another first-rounder in two years and maybe a fifth this time (Roger's feeling generous), and at least a million bucks out of Kraft's pocket. That's the standard now, isn't it? Whatever other clubs do is ignored but the Patriots get blamed for it. After all, they flat-out STOLE a first-rounder, fourth-rounder, and a million bucks from the Pats. Talk about white-collar crime!

One Set Of Rules For 1--Another Set Of Rules For 31!!! :dith:
 
TipRoast said:
You have a remarkably biased attitude toward people about whom you know very little.

For example, look into what Paul Allen has done since he retired from Microsoft. Being the owner of professional sports teams is only a fraction of what interests him, and he does a tremendous amount of philanthropic work.

And that just one of the owners. I'll grant you that some of the owners are real pieces of work (Jim Irsay), and few approach the Paul Allen level, but to assume that a single two-word phrase (making money) adequately describes all 32 owners is naïve in the extreme.
Click to expand...
BFD. They give a little back to make it look like they are trying to make up for the millions they ground under their heels on the way to their billions. Some are naive or optimistic enough to fall for it.

Whether "that's all" they care about it immaterial. The fact remains that if you assume that is their primary motive in any situation involving the running of the league, you will be right 99.9999% of the time. Since they perceive that Goodell is good at making them money, and all his supposed screw ups end up increasing ratings and thus make more money, he's in as secure a position as he ever was. Anyone who thinks he's on the hot seat is just fooling themselves.
 
DeflatedFan said:
BFD. They give a little back to make it look like they are trying to make up for the millions they ground under their heels on the way to their billions. Some are naive or optimistic enough to fall for it.

Whether "that's all" they care about it immaterial. The fact remains that if you assume that is their primary motive in any situation involving the running of the league, you will be right 99.9999% of the time. Since they perceive that Goodell is good at making them money, and all his supposed screw ups end up increasing ratings and thus make more money, he's in as secure a position as he ever was. Anyone who thinks he's on the hot seat is just fooling themselves.
Click to expand...
So your original remark - "Making money is all any of these guys care about" - is now immaterial. And you further distance yourself from it by restricting it to situations involving running of the league.

It seems to me that from what you have posted that you think all rich people got their money by taking advantage of everyone they encountered as they built their fortunes, and that none of them have a regard for anything other than pecuniary interests. Is that an accurate assessment of your viewpoint?
 
DeflatedFan said:
BFD. They give a little back to make it look like they are trying to make up for the millions they ground under their heels on the way to their billions. Some are naive or optimistic enough to fall for it.

Whether "that's all" they care about it immaterial. The fact remains that if you assume that is their primary motive in any situation involving the running of the league, you will be right 99.9999% of the time. Since they perceive that Goodell is good at making them money, and all his supposed screw ups end up increasing ratings and thus make more money, he's in as secure a position as he ever was. Anyone who thinks he's on the hot seat is just fooling themselves.
Click to expand...

From Wiki

Microsoft

Main articles: History of Microsoft and Microsoft

Allen co-founded Microsoft with Bill Gates in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in 1975, and began marketing a BASIC programming language interpreter.[10] Allen came up with the original name of "Micro-Soft," as recounted in a 1995 Fortune magazine article.[12] In 1980, after promising to deliver IBM a Disk Operating System (DOS) they had not yet developed for the Intel 8088-based IBM PC, Allen spearheaded a deal for Microsoft to purchase a Quick and Dirty Operating System (QDOS) written by Tim Paterson who, at the time, was employed at Seattle Computer Products. As a result of this transaction, Microsoft was able to secure a contract to supply the DOS that would eventually run on IBM's PC line. This contract with IBM was the watershed in Microsoft history that led to Allen and Gates' wealth.[10]

Allen was diagnosed with Hodgkin's lymphoma in 1982. His cancer was successfully treated by several months of radiation therapy. However, he did not return to Microsoft and began distancing himself from the company.[10] Allen officially resigned from his position on the Microsoft Board of Directors in November 2000 but was asked to consult as a senior strategy advisor to the company's executives and still owns a reported 100 million shares.[13
Click to expand...

So how exactly did Allen "grind" anyone under his heels, let alone "millions"?

The worse thing you can say is he "took advantage" of Paterson by buying QDOS for far far less than what DOS would make for Mircrosquish.

After that deal went through, he effectively retired.

So does that mean he ground "one" under his heels?
 
O_P_T said:
From Wiki



So how exactly did Allen "grind" anyone under his heels, let alone "millions"?

The worse thing you can say is he "took advantage" of Paterson by buying QDOS for far far less than what DOS would make for Mircrosquish.

After that deal went through, he effectively retired.

So does that mean he ground "one" under his heels?
Click to expand...
To me. it's a figure of speech indicating that one person who has great power uses that power to further reduce the power of the less powerful. Basically, trying to use neutral words.

Microsoft took greed to new heights. Personally, I love the concept that if I buy something from them, I don't own it. Without their permission I can only use it on one computer and if I have two computers I buy another, and if I buy a new computer I buy another for that computer, and if my computer dies I by another. Each of which I pay top dollar for.

NO one gets as filthy rich as Allen by being nice with the general population.
 
spacecrime said:
To me. it's a figure of speech indicating that one person who has great power uses that power to further reduce the power of the less powerful. Basically, trying to use neutral words.

Microsoft took greed to new heights. Personally, I love the concept that if I buy something from them, I don't own it. Without their permission I can only use it on one computer and if I have two computers I buy another, and if I buy a new computer I buy another for that computer, and if my computer dies I by another. Each of which I pay top dollar for.

NO one gets as filthy rich as Allen by being nice with the general population.
Click to expand...

No, you have a software license that lets you install it on one computer at a time.

I've transfered my software to replacement computers multiple times.

Tell me, do you think that you should be able to make multiple copies of music, movies, artwork, e-books, etc?

If you can, what's to prevent you from giving it to others?

Don't you think the artist that created that work should get revenue from it's sale?

If yes, how is software different?
 
Am I the only one who has noticed that this thread has drifted in a direction that maybe should be moved to the Political Forum? popcorn
 
O_P_T said:
If you can, what's to prevent you from giving it to others?

Don't you think the artist that created that work should get revenue from it's sale?

If yes, how is software different?
Click to expand...
Artists, writers etc get revenue by selling things they create. When a painter sells a painting, the buyer owns it and can give it away or sell it or whatever.

Software is different because if I buy a car, when done with it I can give it to a family member or sell it. If I move and get a new garage I don't have to buy a new car to put in it. I can put the car I already own. I don't have to buy a new car and throw the other one away every time I move. That's software licensing for you.

It's legal but that doesn't make it right.

Obviously you think differently, and Microsoft loves you for it. Adobe even more so as they now charge per month for developer programs.

Me, I believe if you want to sell something, the people who bought it own it. I'm a writer. People give books away and swap them and sell them because they friggin own them. Now Kindles have taken a lesson from software and basically license books, as you say.

Software licensing corporations make an obsene amount of money, and they make most of it from people who live month to month. It's the way of the world for ordinary people with little power to be screwed by those who hold the power. I don't like it and am forced into it, but damned if I'll, "Thank you, sir. May I have another."

YMMV and that is fine. It's a difference of opinion that makes horse races possible.

But if you think getting a new copy of downloaded software to put on a new computer after your old one died is easy or often even possible, you've never tried to do it.
 
Your refs flat out fvcked Detroit Rog.

Last 2 minutes. Refs huddled. NY in their ear. And they all fvcked it.

Let's focus on air pressure though.

Doosh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top