1 hour ago, Mike030270 said:

Nice sentiment but he's still going to take that record breaking contract

BB. GoT last 2 season were horrible

Well, it's the attitude I love as a fan and won't mind giving him the momentary record breaking contract.

BB- loved it but it just got too dark for me. I lost the taste for it and didn't watch the last two seasons.

GoT- Loved it, but then a great writer and story teller had to give way to mediocre and unimaginative boobs.

Ozark was another that started strong but fizzled at the end.

In my lifetime I think the best series ender was MASH. I think Star Trek Next Generation had a good one too.

13 minutes ago, Freshmilk said:

Well, it's the attitude I love as a fan and won't mind giving him the momentary record breaking contract.

BB- loved it but it just got too dark for me. I lost the taste for it and didn't watch the last two seasons.

GoT- Loved it, but then a great writer and story teller had to give way to mediocre and unimaginative boobs.

Ozark was another that started strong but fizzled at the end.

In my lifetime I think the best series ender was MASH. I think Star Trek Next Generation had a good one too.

Robert Altman hated the TV version of MASH. Said it lacked insanity and callousness. I can see his point.

11 minutes ago, just relax said:

Robert Altman hated the TV version of MASH. Said it lacked insanity and callousness. I can see his point.

That's ok. He's merely the director of the movie version of the novel. The TV show definitely deviated from the movie... and the book. The author of the novel probably didn't like the show either. But, it was a great series, IMO. More than the single story that it told, it changed how TV shows operated, and the stories they could tell. And the final episode might have been the greatest ending episode of any TV series in TV history, IMHO.

Besides, there's plenty of insanity and callousness in the world. Do we need more?

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

It’s basically trickle down economics. They care far more for the top percentile than they do the bottom.

Trickle down economics can work in a free market economy, but the NFL is definitely not a free market economy. It is a constrained, capped economy.

Imagine your local teachers union advocating for increased salaries for administrators, and having the increases by holding down teachers’ pay.

What Carter is arguing for is keeping down his pay so that the rest of his lesser paid teammates can be paid more. What a novel idea.

2 hours ago, just relax said:

You’re in for some treats. Great shows, characters, scripts, acting. I loved GoT but they blew the final season.

A friend of mine once described The Sopranos as a "When you lie down with dogs you get up with fleas” drama. He used that same description for White Lotus. I’ve never put his Sopranos description to the test. I did try and watch one episode of White Lotus and turned it off half way through. There was not a single likeable character.

1 hour ago, Freshmilk said:

Well, it's the attitude I love as a fan and won't mind giving him the momentary record breaking contract.

BB- loved it but it just got too dark for me. I lost the taste for it and didn't watch the last two seasons.

GoT- Loved it, but then a great writer and story teller had to give way to mediocre and unimaginative boobs.

Ozark was another that started strong but fizzled at the end.

In my lifetime I think the best series ender was MASH. I think Star Trek Next Generation had a good one too.

Speaking of Ozark, Justified was an outstanding series.

9 minutes ago, mattwill said:

A friend of mine once described The Sopranos as a "When you lie down with dogs you get up with fleas” drama. He used that same description for White Lotus. I’ve never put his Sopranos description to the test. I did try and watch one episode of White Lotus and turned it off half way through. There was not a single likeable character.

My wife and I had the same experience with White Lotus. Do try The Sopranos. There is a lot to like even with the worst of some of those characters and James Gandolfini is just fantastic. One thing I was not prepared for was how funny it was plus, how can you not love a show in which the guitarist for the E Street Band has a featured role?

32 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Trickle down economics can work in a free market economy, but the NFL is definitely not a free market economy. It is a constrained, capped economy.

Imagine your local teachers union advocating for increased salaries for administrators, and having the increases by holding down teachers’ pay.

What Carter is arguing for is keeping down his pay so that the rest of his lesser paid teammates can be paid more. What a novel idea.

1. That’s why I said basically. The NFLPA wants players to get paid the most they can so it trickles down to lesser players too. They don’t care about a "capped economy”. Again, they want players to get the most they can and leave the burden of managing the cap to the teams. The only thing they care about when it comes to the cap is how can we get a bigger piece of the revenue to increase the cap.

2. Carter isn’t arguing anything. He gave a standard PR quote that means nothing because he’s months away from even being able to negotiate a new contract.

3. You are fooling yourself if you think Carter taking less means other players would get more. Every offseason for the last few years Howie has made veterans take pay cuts to stay on the team. He’s not going to sign Carter for cheap just to give more money to Ojomo. You can frame it as Carter would take less to sign more players or keep the team intact, but in no way would anyone else get more than what Howie thinks they are worth.

45 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Trickle down economics can work in a free market economy, but the NFL is definitely not a free market economy. It is a constrained, capped economy.

Imagine your local teachers union advocating for increased salaries for administrators, and having the increases by holding down teachers’ pay.

What Carter is arguing for is keeping down his pay so that the rest of his lesser paid teammates can be paid more. What a novel idea.

Trickle down economics never works. There is a reason it is called trickle down rather than waterfall down.

I'd be totally shocked if Carter took less money. It's his first contract. He's going to be #1 for however long it takes the next player to break the record (usually not long)

Also keep in mind his agent. No agent is going to say "sure let’s get less money so I get paid less too.” His agent is also Drew Rosenhaus. So not much more needs to be said about that.

2 hours ago, mattwill said:

Speaking of Ozark, Justified was an outstanding series.

Especially Season 2 with Margot Martendale.

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

1. That’s why I said basically. The NFLPA wants players to get paid the most they can so it trickles down to lesser players too. They don’t care about a "capped economy”. Again, they want players to get the most they can and leave the burden of managing the cap to the teams. The only thing they care about when it comes to the cap is how can we get a bigger piece of the revenue to increase the cap.

2. Carter isn’t arguing everything. He gave a standard PR quote that means nothing because he’s months away from even being able to negotiate a new contract.

3. You are fooling yourself if you think Carter taking less means other players would get more. Every offseason for the last few years Howie has made veterans take pay cuts to stay on the team. He’s not going to sign Carter for cheap just to give more money to Ojomo. You can frame it as Carter would take less to sign more players or keep the team intact, but in no way would anyone else get more than what Howie thinks they are worth.

Regarding 1. the NFLPA agreed to, and regularly renegotiates, the Salary Cap amount. Those actions are not consistent with "They don’t care about a "capped economy””. You may be right, but it makes no rational sense. Perhaps they aren’t rational.

Regarding 2. and 3., you more than likely are right, and it’s off in the distance regardless. Out of curiosity given the IDL average salaries listed below, where would you set the Over/Under prop for Carter’s Average per Year if you were Las Vegas?

1 hour ago, mattwill said:

Regarding 1. the NFLPA agreed to, and regularly renegotiates, the Salary Cap amount. Those actions are not consistent with "They don’t care about a "capped economy””. You may be right, but it makes no rational sense. Perhaps they aren’t rational.

Regarding 2. and 3., you more than likely are right, and it’s off in the distance regardless. Out of curiosity given the IDL average salaries listed below, where would you set the Over/Under prop for Carter’s Average per Year if you were Las Vegas?

I made my "they don’t care about a capped economy” point pretty clear. They care about getting the most cap space they can get. They don’t care about how teams will make it all work and fit under the cap.

In regard to where he’d land contract wise. Right now I’d say between Wilkins and Jones. By the time he becomes eligible for a new deal, he should be setting the market if all things continue to trend in the right direction.

5 hours ago, mattwill said:

Trickle down economics can work in a free market economy, but the NFL is definitely not a free market economy. It is a constrained, capped economy.

Imagine your local teachers union advocating for increased salaries for administrators, and having the increases by holding down teachers’ pay.

What Carter is arguing for is keeping down his pay so that the rest of his lesser paid teammates can be paid more. What a novel idea.

No need to 'imagine' that. That's the reality.

5 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

1. That’s why I said basically. The NFLPA wants players to get paid the most they can so it trickles down to lesser players too. They don’t care about a "capped economy”. Again, they want players to get the most they can and leave the burden of managing the cap to the teams. The only thing they care about when it comes to the cap is how can we get a bigger piece of the revenue to increase the cap.

2. Carter isn’t arguing anything. He gave a standard PR quote that means nothing because he’s months away from even being able to negotiate a new contract.

3. You are fooling yourself if you think Carter taking less means other players would get more. Every offseason for the last few years Howie has made veterans take pay cuts to stay on the team. He’s not going to sign Carter for cheap just to give more money to Ojomo. You can frame it as Carter would take less to sign more players or keep the team intact, but in no way would anyone else get more than what Howie thinks they are worth.

100%.

200% for the bolded and underlined. Milton Williams just got a huge deal, because of the past deals garnered by the likes of Fletcher Cox and Aaron Donald, and more recently Alim McNeil. And when 'nice' players like Milton Williams get franchise altering type deals, the cap number needs to be increased to be able to pay the true tide raisers. Then the minimum salary also goes up, and everyone makes more money. And when it doesn't increase enough because of increased revenue, they push for a bigger cut of the pie.

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I made my "they don’t care about a capped economy” point pretty clear. They care about getting the most cap space they can get. They don’t care about how teams will make it all work and fit under the cap.

In regard to where he’d land contract wise. Right now I’d say between Wilkins and Jones. By the time he becomes eligible for a new deal, he should be setting the market if all things continue to trend in the right direction.

I think he's going to get Jones money plus on the aggregate. I'm not sure how Howie will structure it, but on initial blush it will reset the DT market... likely be a 'highest paid defender' type deal. Assuming his upcoming season matches and/or exceeds last year... and there's no reason to think it won't. As Vic (and Trot) said, He doesn't even know how to play the position yet... he's just getting by on sheer talent right now. When he puts it all together, we are likely looking at the greatest DT in Eagles' history... and that's significant considering we've seen Jerome Brown and Fletcher Cox in the various shades of Eagles' green.

7 hours ago, mattwill said:

Trickle down economics can work in a free market economy, but the NFL is definitely not a free market economy. It is a constrained, capped economy.

Imagine your local teachers union advocating for increased salaries for administrators, and having the increases by holding down teachers’ pay.

What Carter is arguing for is keeping down his pay so that the rest of his lesser paid teammates can be paid more. What a novel idea.

It can work but 40 years of trickle down data shows it doesnt

12 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

What Carter is arguing for is keeping down his pay so that the rest of his lesser paid teammates can be paid more. What a novel idea.

Maybe they could start a foundation. Call it the JC98 foundation or something like that.

21 minutes ago, eglz1 said:

Maybe they could start a foundation. Call it the JC98 foundation or something like that.

I didn't post that.

2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Jalen Reagor was the correct choice

Weird opinion

29 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I didn't post that.

30 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I didn't post that.

I think this was copied from a post by MattWill. Not sure why it had your name associated with it.

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Weird opinion

29 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

IIRC, he had issues with his throwing shoulder in San Diego before he went to NO.