1 minute ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

I'm not sure about the sixers thing but, I know way to many eagles fans that also cheer for the Steelers.... It drives me nuts

Really???, I knew one that used be in here, I thought he was an outlier 

That seems odd and definitely fair weather.

I mean unless the Steelers are playing giants skins cowboys eff em😡

 

1 hour ago, Next_Up said:

I have some advice for you.  You may have noticed that your posts often become contentious on a personalized level. You should consider that your style of discussion might have something to do with this. In any mediated contentious discussion, a mediator will often set a ground rule that you cannot talk about the other person or present their opinion, especially in absolute terms. You may not be aware but you break this rule the majority of the time. My advice is to try and change your style. Like, instead of "Phillies fans are fair weather fans." That is an absolutist statement, black and white thinking, that states that you know how others, many on this board, think. You might try something like, "what I have observed is that of all the Philly teams, the Phillies appear to have the most fair weather fans. It's my opinion, how do you all see this?"

A style change might get you into many more productive conversations and out of so many contentiously personalized ones, in my $0.02 humble opinion.

 

 

1 minute ago, Utebird said:

Not sure parents in Europe are going to be any more willing than parents in the US to sign their kids up to play in a high impact collision sport and open themselves up to head injury.

Is the league hoping that they can hide CTE reports from European parents or that European parents don't care about the things that are causing the decline of popularity of youth football in the US.

I think the amount of kids in Europe wanting to play football is minimal, soccer, rugby, basketball and even cricket ate king there.

Rugby in Europe  is considered a gentleman's game as is cricket, American football is not.

CTE is not unique to American Football.  Soccer players have been found to have an increased risk of CTE.  Rugby has a much higher rate of concussions vs. football.  The rate of catastrophic injuries for Rugby players is roughly 4 times that of NFL players. 

The sport will appeal to some people at a youth level.  It's not like the sport will take over the popularity of other sports.  I do think pro teams would encourage participation of more people in the sport.  Growing participation is the key to continuing the success of the League.  

28 minutes ago, Utebird said:

I lived in SF, no one gives a crap about the warriors or the giants when they aren't winning.

And the San Jose sharks no one cares about at all. There are some die hard hockey fans I guess but San Jose is like an hour out of SF and golden state warriors  are in Oakland which has a rival with SF so some people that are say A's and warriors fans won't be fans of niners out  of principle because it's in SF where the giants are.🤷‍♂️

Not to mention the hardcore Oakland raiders fans who hate those uppity niners fans.

I used to take the BART Into the city for work and when the Giants were in the WS and won it that bart was full of tons of people wearing giants gear, when a couple years before that no one was wearing giants gear, no one wears niners gear, except old people.🤷‍♂️

Almost forgot about the kings as well, it's tough being a kings fan in N California but those that are love their kings cuz they live in a cow town and they turn their nose up at uppity SF and those rude people in Oakland.

I dont know if I'd call fans in N Cal fair weather I just think there are so many things in SF to occupy ones attention and The close proximity of Oakland to SF and SAC jumbles up loyalties.

Where as Utah there's only one team, the Utah Jazz, Jazz fans aren't fair weather, it's not cool anywhere out of Utah to be a Jazz fan, it's not cool in Utah, once  you're in it  you're in it through thick and thin, what else you gonna do ski???

In Philly all your teams are right next to each other if I understand. 

They all have the same first names, it's not the cherry hill flyers VS the Scranton eagles, they're all Philly.

You east coast states are so small geographically  that all that jumbling that happens in N Cal happens in multiple states where other state rivals are, NJ Maryland NY.

I guess the closest thing would be Pittsburgh, but they dont have a basketball team so🤷‍♂️.

Are people that are Steelers penguins and pirate fans not fans of the Sixers out of principle?

 

I don't think Pittsburgh cares too much about pro basketball.   Only using my small sample size of people I know out there but none seem to really care for basketball.  I'd imagine whatever fans are there just pick their pro team for whatever reason since Pittsburgh is about 4--5 hours away.

25 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

That’s been the conversation every time there was expansion, and every time it was proven to not have the affect it was fearmongered to have. There wasn’t 28 pro bowl QBs in the 90s and the league balance was supposedly ruined when Carolina and Jacksonville were added. Or after when browns #2 and Houston. It only got more popular, made more money. Going from 32 to 36 isn’t going to hurt anything; Talent gets diluted evenly, never has every team had an equal shot to win in a 5 year window than right now. Competition sells tickets, not Kirk Cousins and Derek Carr.

Dude, you are wrong. Die on that issue if you want but that won't change that you are. You want preseason 4th quarter talent. Got it. And honestly adding those teams has diluted things because where we are right now isn't even close to 32 QB who have a legit chance to win. Add 4 more teams and make it worse. That's smart. F it why not add 8 more teams? How about 10? There is a line and financially being able to support something is different than having a product that is enjoyable.

1 hour ago, Next_Up said:

I have some advice for you.  You may have noticed that your posts often become contentious on a personalized level. You should consider that your style of discussion might have something to do with this. In any mediated contentious discussion, a mediator will often set a ground rule that you cannot talk about the other person or present their opinion, especially in absolute terms. You may not be aware but you break this rule the majority of the time. My advice is to try and change your style. Like, instead of "Phillies fans are fair weather fans." That is an absolutist statement, black and white thinking, that states that you know how others, many on this board, think. You might try something like, "what I have observed is that of all the Philly teams, the Phillies appear to have the most fair weather fans. It's my opinion, how do you all see this?"

A style change might get you into many more productive conversations and out of so many contentiously personalized ones, in my $0.02 humble opinion.

13 minutes ago, Utebird said:

Not sure parents in Europe are going to be any more willing than parents in the US to sign their kids up to play in a high impact collision sport and open themselves up to head injury.

Is the league hoping that they can hide CTE reports from European parents or that European parents don't care about the things that are causing the decline of popularity of youth football in the US.

I think the amount of kids in Europe wanting to play football is minimal. Soccer, rugby, basketball and even cricket are king there.

Rugby in Europe  is considered a gentleman's game as is cricket, American football is not.

I think the NFL in Europe is a fools errand.

Basketball would make more sense, team wise.

CTE is a bigger thing over here now.  My nephew wore a football in the face at school a couple of months ago, and was diagnosed with a "mild concussion" and sent home from school.  Now they did no official concussion testing, but he got to spend a day at home resting while playing video games.

The saying over here is football is a gentleman’s game played by hooligans, and rugby is a hooligan’s game played by gentlemen.  Quite apt

3 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

CTE is not unique to American Football.  Soccer players have been found to have an increased risk of CTE.  Rugby has a much higher rate of concussions vs. football.  The rate of catastrophic injuries for Rugby players is roughly 4 times that of NFL players. 

The sport will appeal to some people at a youth level.  It's not like the sport will take over the popularity of other sports.  I do think pro teams would encourage participation of more people in the sport.  Growing participation is the key to continuing the success of the League.  

This is a very sad story about CTE in Rugby

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/dec/08/steve-thompson-interview-world-cup-rugby-union-dementia-special-report

For those who like PFF, they had Ryan Neal graded as their #1 safety in the NFL.

He's now available.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-final-2022-safety-rankings

Prob out of Eagles price range.

11 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

Dude, you are wrong. Die on that issue if you want but that won't change that you are. You want preseason 4th quarter talent. Got it. And honestly adding those teams has diluted things because where we are right now isn't even close to 32 QB who have a legit chance to win. Add 4 more teams and make it worse. That's smart.

It’s been that way since the 1940’s. Are you arguing that the NFL has gone downhill ever since it expanded beyond 8-12 teams as there weren’t enough QBs in your eyes who could win it all?

Do you reject Nick Foles’ ring because it’s self-defeatist to your soapbox? Teams can win without elite QBs, and adding 4 teams won’t hurt anyone’s chances. The competition will balance out evenly.

It’s only "4th preseason talent” to you because we have 32 teams. 3 decades ago 1/4 of the guys on our roster were 4th preseason talent. Should we shame them for that? Getting more teams will add opportunities for more players to play, as it has every time we’ve expanded.

3 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

For those who like PFF, they had Ryan Neal graded as their #1 safety in the NFL.

He's now available.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-final-2022-safety-rankings

Prob out of Eagles price range.

Never know, Howie created a good amount of room that could either be used for Hurts or situations like this.  Plus the safety market clearly didn't go the way many thought.

7 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

For those who like PFF, they had Ryan Neal graded as their #1 safety in the NFL.

He's now available.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-final-2022-safety-rankings

Prob out of Eagles price range.

The Eagles signed him as an UDFA like 5 years ago. Forget what draft but remember his name.

Edit: 2018

 

2 minutes ago, Texas Eagle said:

The Eagles signed him as an UDFA like 5 years ago. Forget what draft but remember his name.

Yep 2018 but never made it to the first preseason game I think.  Kicked around for a few years before really getting playing time

8 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

It’s been that way since the 1940’s. Are you arguing that the NFL has gone downhill ever since it expanded beyond 8-12 teams as there weren’t enough QBs in your eyes who could win it all?

Do you reject Nick Foles’ ring because it’s self-defeatist to your soapbox? Teams can win without elite QBs, and adding 4 teams won’t hurt anyone’s chances. The competition will balance out evenly.

It’s only "4th preseason talent” to you because we have 32 teams. 4 decades ago 1/3 of the guys on our roster were 4th preseason talent. Should we shame them for that? Getting more teams will add opportunities for more players to play, as it has every time we’ve expanded.

Yes, I do think the NFL is already on a path to go downhill because kids are being moved away from football and more towards other sports because of concussions. That's a smart time to expand.

How is Nick Foles playing now? He'd be great starting for a team for 17 games, right? The lighting in a bottle is a desperate attempt, but of course you would pick that as an example. You are off your rocker on this and I wish you the best dying on that hill. Again, why not add 6 or 8 teams? How about 10? There is a balance before things become diluted and not as enjoyable. You aren't going to get that and I don't care. You are the guy who thinks it's a great idea to open another pizza shop in the neighborhood because the other new ones worked out OK. 

11 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

For those who like PFF, they had Ryan Neal graded as their #1 safety in the NFL.

He's now available.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-final-2022-safety-rankings

Prob out of Eagles price range.

 

Has the Seattle connection to our new DC.  

7 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Never know, Howie created a good amount of room that could either be used for Hurts or situations like this.  Plus the safety market clearly didn't go the way many thought.

And Desai was just in Seattle

1 minute ago, pgcd3 said:

And Desai was just in Seattle

Oh good catch, wasn't even thinking that.

55 minutes ago, Moderator12 said:

Awwww, F.

 

@Moderator4 I'm taking a vacation day.  You're on duty now

After he gets you coffee and a cinnamon bun, right??

2 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Oh good catch, wasn't even thinking that.

Seems like Neal would be a good compliment to the Edmunds/Reed type but I can't say I scrutinized his game tape at this point

 

10 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

Yes, I do think the NFL is already on a path to go downhill because kids are being moved away from football and more towards other sports because of concussions. That's a smart time to expand.

How is Nick Foles playing now? He'd be great starting for a team for 17 games, right? The lighting in a bottle is a desperate attempt, but of course you would pick that as an example. You are off your rocker on this and I wish you the best dying on that hill. Again, why not add 6 or 8 teams? How about 10? There is a balance before things become diluted and not as enjoyable. You aren't going to get that and I don't care.

Of course I picked Nick foles. "Shame on you for choosing the most obvious rebuttal.” And The nfl will add 6-8 teams, and add 10 at some point, some day. Is college football so unpopular and the stands so empty because there’s too many teams, too many players?

Dilution doesn’t do anything to ruin the nfl. In your examples, anything more than 2 teams can be seen as dilution. You can go ahead and argue there are 30 teams of rosters full of carpenters and plumbers. Once upon a time, I’m sure someone thought that too. Relativity.

As long as all teams remain competitive, just like in college, the nfl will continue to be more and more successful. What is and isn’t too much dilution changes with perception. after we expand to whatever the next total will be, it’ll take maybe 3 years before everyone accepts THAT as the norm and anything more will be too diluted. That’s how it always is. We can piss and moan about it, but it doesn’t mean it won’t happen and be wildly successful

6 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

 

The new rules are not going to do anything to attendance or ratings. I don't really watch a ton of regular season baseball, I'm too busy doing other stuff in my evenings, but I did catch like an inning of yesterday's game and I honestly thought the new rules made the product worse. I really had no interest in watching any of that game. It didn't have time to breathe.

But generally speaking, I think regular season baseball is a really bland product. And no rule changes will make it any different for baseball.

12 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Of course I picked Nick foles. "Shame on you for choosing the most obvious rebuttal.” And The nfl will add 6-8 teams, and add 10 at some point, some day. Is college football so unpopular and the stands so empty because there’s too many teams, too many players?

Dilution doesn’t do anything to ruin the nfl. In your examples, anything more than 2 teams can be seen as dilution. You can go ahead and argue there are 30 teams of rosters full of carpenters and plumbers. Once upon a time, I’m sure someone thought that too. Relativity.

As long as all teams remain competitive, just like in college, the nfl will continue to be more and more successful. What is and isn’t too much dilution changes with perception. after we expand to whatever the next total will be, it’ll take maybe 3 years before everyone accepts THAT as the norm and anything more will be too diluted. That’s how it always is. We can piss and moan about it, but it doesn’t mean it won’t happen and be wildly successful

You are the guy who misreads the market and over-expands and becomes a business failure. Got it. No, that doesn't mean the NFL will become a failure, but you have that mindset. Oh, how have those other leagues doing that thought...hey there are a lot of college teams, so we will do great, right? Every single league has failed and it's because of talent. World League, Arena, XFL, etc. You don't see that either. We get it.

Hey Eagle fans what do you guys think about us losing Rodgers most likely?

47 minutes ago, UK Eagle said:

The UK is out of the EU, so the rules as they once were, are different here.  In terms of stadia, White Hart Lane is a very obvious choice for a team as it was built with it in mind.  Other than that, stadia would be an interesting problem as there is a ton of sport in the Europe at the same time of year, so any teams would likely not have a permanent home for a number of years, if at all.  Germany would make sense for a team - my guess is a team would be in Spain and maybe France/Holland.

I assume the idea is a no goer though; especially come playoff time.  Much more likely a team like the Jags is moved.

My assumption would be the players would be employed in the USA, but play games/be based in Europe for the season, or just the games in the season - esp with a salary cap and the currencies involved.  Logistically, not sure how much sense in making players and team personnel based in Europe permanently.  The PS would be an interesting concept thousands of miles away; Julian Vandervelde, come to London for a week and then you are cut. Etc

The key for international taxing is where one is a legal resident. There are strict rules and they vary between countries. The most important criteria is physical presence during a calendar year. Other things like owning property can also play into it.