Bobref

Wentz had some skills, and some very nice stats, no arguing that. He fell flat in the biggest moments. No arguing that, either. But in the final analysis, I believe the issue is Wentz lacks the leadership qualities a QB needs. A QB has to lead. Doesn’t have to be a cheerleader. Doesn’t need to be vocal. But the people in the locker room have to have confidence in you, and they didn’t. Regardless of won/loss record, that’s why they’re cutting bait after 1 season.

And how would you know if you did see one?

🤣😂 I’d say @Muda69went a little further than that. He said it was on the way to becoming the WWE.

Word is that Mitchell Trubisky is going to sign a nice deal with the Giants, following his old OC, and that there were a number of teams ready to pay him well. If he goes to the Giants, he will start more games this season than Daniel Jones. Book it.

The two are inextricably intertwined, at least, in the minds of the owners. And do you really think the general population views sports gambling as tarnishing the league’s image? I don’t. Gambling is mainstream today. The fact that it is also extremely lucrative for the league doesn’t make it bad, or shady. It’s simply another form of entertainment.

At least it’s not going to be “Be sharp and play hard, men … according to how you bet the game.”

@Muda69will explain the “slippery slope.”

In this context, “integrity” does not relate to moral quality. Perhaps “legitimacy,” would have been a better choice of words. In other words, nothing that will discourage people from gambling because they don’t think the game is on the level. Strictly business.

People can certainly arrive at different conclusions on the morality issue. But it’s a no-brainer on the business side. It’s nothing more than a form of quality control over the product being sold for billions of dollars.

The slippery slope to what?

I get a lot of pictures taken with me already. But mostly it’s just people who want a picture of themselves in which they look good by comparison. 😉

Could not disagree more.

You have taken leave of your senses.

On the contrary, it’s totally consistent with their partnerships with the gambling industry. It’s not just the “integrity of the game” that’s important anymore. It’s also the “integrity of the line.”

I will bet you a dollar that when all is said and done, what Steven Ross actually said to Flores was nothing like that. Probably a lot more like this: “We understand this is your first year, and we are looking to the future. So, there are incentives in the contract in the form of bonuses, and the won-loss record does not negatively affect them.” Through an agent, lawyer, and the press, that gets translated into getting paid for losing games. Ridiculous.

When he mentioned being the bus driver for the cheerleaders, I just thought that was wishful thinking on his part. My error. 😂🤣

Interesting that you’re proud of beating a school out of a few bucks. Not cool.

They have (or at least, had, for a long time) a different mindset than most programs. They did things the “Hobart Way.” That’s what “marching to the beat of a different drummer” means. Which is what we were discussing.

Which has nothing to do with anything under discussion.

Hey, for decades their home field was a landfill in the making. Who does that?

They march to the beat of a different drummer in Hobart.

Yes, that’s why I referenced a mixed metaphor. He conflated “death knell” and “nail in the coffin” and came up with “death nail.”

If it were a child’s game, that would be true. If it were a multi-billion dollar, multinational enterprise … not so much.

We’re not really disagreeing, are we? We both agree that our society values certain types of entertainment more highly than some forms of inarguably vital services. I agree that it’s weird. But the laws of supply and demand don’t care. And I know we’ll you’re no rookie. That’s why I was surprised you made such a rookie mistake. 😆

I find the labeling of one side or another as “greedy” to be laughable. The owners believe they are entitled to maximize profits because they are the ones with all the capital at risk. They’re right. The players feel entitled to a bigger slice of the pie because it is their talents on display that generate the revenue. They are right, too. Both are attempting to achieve their own goals and maneuver for a favorable outcome. How could anyone realistically expect it to be otherwise? How can one side or the other be “at fault,” when both are doing exactly what they are supposed to do? As far as “greed” goes, how much money is enough? The answer is that “enough” is the amount of money the other guy has. It’s never the amount you have.