Krys Barch-Hammered

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    A popular myth is that a lof of wealthy people "earned" their money, the truth is that very few them, *VERY* few of them do.  They were born into it.  If not born directly into a lot of money, then connected with the means of sending them to the best schools & etc.

    [/QUOTE]

    Maybe so, but don't tell me they still haven't educated themselves in order to keep the business profitable. The one's that don't, usually lose their business's. eg Peter Pocklington.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    The PA is very interested in viability.  It's the basis of their paycheck.  But it's "overall" viability, and  I can't think of a much more logical arrangement.

    What keeps salaries "rising"...the only thing that does that... is the "increased revenue" generated from those who wish to ante up at the leagues pay window.  Seems pretty fair too.

    Again, stuff like expansion, weak teams, who pays what expenses...not really the point.  We have a cap, it's here to stay.  It'll continue to be a % of revenues.

    What should that percentage be?

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    stevegm,

    How about 50/50?  I can't imagine a position either side could take to fight against that.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    stevegm,

    How about 50/50?  I can't imagine a position either side could take to fight against that.

    [/QUOTE]


    That always seemed fair and sensible to me too. Maybe it makes too much sense.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    50/50 is what I've been sayin too, and I think whatever it is.....should be cast in stone for a long time.  

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    Players wanting more than half of the pie are not being reasonable. 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    BsLegion, my thinking completely.  50/50% leaves no room to blame.  

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bisson1. Show Bisson1's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    Is this what you guys see with responses or is it just me? 

     

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bisson1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Say what you will about the skating stooge, and yes we are talking about income levels that most of us get no where near, but going from 750k a year to 600k a year (20% rollback) has got to affect him much more that a player earning even 1.5 mil a year getting rolled back to 1.2 mil a year.

    [/QUOTE]


    That is true. These guys have a lot of money so they live in expensive homes, own expensive stuff... losing that much money probably has an effect on them. That being said, I still can't feel too bad for them.

    [/QUOTE]


     â€œWe make a lot of money, but we spend a lot of money too.” - Patrick Ewing.

    Still the benchmark for empathy-killing statements by professional athletes.

    [/QUOTE]


    Don't forget Ty Law -- "We all gotta eat".

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    That's what we all see, Biss.  Some of us, when quoting others, take five seconds and clean it up before posting.  Others, like those scoundrels Kelvana and Fletchiepoo, are too busy feathering their hair to be bothered.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share